<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_24_1632228</id>
	<title>Prison Terms For Spammer Ralsky, Scientology DoS Attacker</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1259082000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>tsu doh nimh writes <i>"Alan Ralsky, the 64-year-old dubbed the 'Godfather of Spam,' was <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/11/spam\_godfather\_alan\_ralsky\_get.html">sentenced to 51 months in prison</a> on Monday, the <em>Washington Post</em>'s Security Fix blog reports. According to anti-spam group Spamhaus.org, Ralsky has been spamming since at least 1997, using dozens of aliases and tens of thousands of 'zombies' or hacked PCs to relay junk e-mail. Also sentenced &mdash; to 40 months in jail &mdash; was Ralsky's 48-year-old son-in-law, Scott K. Bradley, and two other men named last year in a 41-count indictment for wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering and violations of the CAN-SPAM Act."</i>

And eldavojohn writes <i>"19-year-old Dmitriy Guzner, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous\_(group)">Anonymous</a> member and <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/08/10/18/1439204/Hacker-Admits-To-Scientology-DDoS-Attack">Scientology DDoS attacker</a>, received <a href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Scientology-Attacker-Gets-Prison-Time-127761.shtml">one year and one day in jail for his admitted crime</a>.  His sentence could have been a maximum ten years.  According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>tsu doh nimh writes " Alan Ralsky , the 64-year-old dubbed the 'Godfather of Spam, ' was sentenced to 51 months in prison on Monday , the Washington Post 's Security Fix blog reports .
According to anti-spam group Spamhaus.org , Ralsky has been spamming since at least 1997 , using dozens of aliases and tens of thousands of 'zombies ' or hacked PCs to relay junk e-mail .
Also sentenced    to 40 months in jail    was Ralsky 's 48-year-old son-in-law , Scott K. Bradley , and two other men named last year in a 41-count indictment for wire fraud , mail fraud , money laundering and violations of the CAN-SPAM Act .
" And eldavojohn writes " 19-year-old Dmitriy Guzner , Anonymous member and Scientology DDoS attacker , received one year and one day in jail for his admitted crime .
His sentence could have been a maximum ten years .
According to the Church of Scientology , Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls , 3.6 million e-mails , 141 million hits on its website , ten acts of vandalism against its property , 22 bomb threats , and eight death threats against Church leaders .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tsu doh nimh writes "Alan Ralsky, the 64-year-old dubbed the 'Godfather of Spam,' was sentenced to 51 months in prison on Monday, the Washington Post's Security Fix blog reports.
According to anti-spam group Spamhaus.org, Ralsky has been spamming since at least 1997, using dozens of aliases and tens of thousands of 'zombies' or hacked PCs to relay junk e-mail.
Also sentenced — to 40 months in jail — was Ralsky's 48-year-old son-in-law, Scott K. Bradley, and two other men named last year in a 41-count indictment for wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering and violations of the CAN-SPAM Act.
"

And eldavojohn writes "19-year-old Dmitriy Guzner, Anonymous member and Scientology DDoS attacker, received one year and one day in jail for his admitted crime.
His sentence could have been a maximum ten years.
According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220178</id>
	<title>Re:Church of Scientology</title>
	<author>billcopc</author>
	<datestamp>1259063940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the DoS here stands for "Denial of Scientology", I'd say it's fair game.</p><p>Look at it this way: most Americans of middle-eastern descent or Muslim faith have been steadily harassed and mistreated over <b>at least</b> the past 8 years, even though less than 1 per 100 MILLION have been identified as known criminals, and the supposed Muslim-originated attack on the WTC resulted in 2976 counted deaths.  That's two victims for every million Muslims.</p><p>Scientologists' numbers are unknown, but are estimated to be less than 100,000.  And yet, they are known to be responsible for at least two of their own members' deaths, an order of magnitude greater than the so-called "Muslim terrorists".  So why the hell are we fighting in the middle east, when Scientology has shown to be 10 times deadlier per-capita ?</p><p>Don't even get me started on catholicism<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the DoS here stands for " Denial of Scientology " , I 'd say it 's fair game.Look at it this way : most Americans of middle-eastern descent or Muslim faith have been steadily harassed and mistreated over at least the past 8 years , even though less than 1 per 100 MILLION have been identified as known criminals , and the supposed Muslim-originated attack on the WTC resulted in 2976 counted deaths .
That 's two victims for every million Muslims.Scientologists ' numbers are unknown , but are estimated to be less than 100,000 .
And yet , they are known to be responsible for at least two of their own members ' deaths , an order of magnitude greater than the so-called " Muslim terrorists " .
So why the hell are we fighting in the middle east , when Scientology has shown to be 10 times deadlier per-capita ? Do n't even get me started on catholicism : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the DoS here stands for "Denial of Scientology", I'd say it's fair game.Look at it this way: most Americans of middle-eastern descent or Muslim faith have been steadily harassed and mistreated over at least the past 8 years, even though less than 1 per 100 MILLION have been identified as known criminals, and the supposed Muslim-originated attack on the WTC resulted in 2976 counted deaths.
That's two victims for every million Muslims.Scientologists' numbers are unknown, but are estimated to be less than 100,000.
And yet, they are known to be responsible for at least two of their own members' deaths, an order of magnitude greater than the so-called "Muslim terrorists".
So why the hell are we fighting in the middle east, when Scientology has shown to be 10 times deadlier per-capita ?Don't even get me started on catholicism :P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30221340</id>
	<title>Re:Scientology is not a religion!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259070600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the difference again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the difference again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the difference again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216944</id>
	<title>Scientology Statistics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259092200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders."</p><p>According to the Curch of Scientology, they have been the fastest growing curch on the planet for, what, some 20-30 years. Long enough that everyone on the planet should be converted by now.</p><p>Guess what, they lie.</p><p>Anon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" According to the Church of Scientology , Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls , 3.6 million e-mails , 141 million hits on its website , ten acts of vandalism against its property , 22 bomb threats , and eight death threats against Church leaders .
" According to the Curch of Scientology , they have been the fastest growing curch on the planet for , what , some 20-30 years .
Long enough that everyone on the planet should be converted by now.Guess what , they lie.Anon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.
"According to the Curch of Scientology, they have been the fastest growing curch on the planet for, what, some 20-30 years.
Long enough that everyone on the planet should be converted by now.Guess what, they lie.Anon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30223004</id>
	<title>Re:Fighting monsters</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259086380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation\_Freakout" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Operation Freakout</a> [wikipedia.org]:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Cooper counter-sued on March 30, 1972, demanding $15.4 million in damages for the ongoing harassment. However, the Church stepped up the harassment, for instance painting her name and phone number on street walls so that she would receive obscene phone calls, and subscribing her to pornographic mailing lists. She also received anonymous death threats and her neighbors received letters claiming that she had a venereal disease.</p><p>In December 1972, a woman ostensibly soliciting funds for United Farm Workers stole a quantity of stationery from Cooper&rsquo;s apartment. A few days later, the New York Church of Scientology &ldquo;received&rdquo; two anonymous bomb threats. The following May, Cooper was indicted for making the bomb threats and arraigned for a Federal grand jury. The threats had been written on her stationery, which was marked with her fingerprints.</p><p>The charges were eventually dropped in 1975 with the filing of a Nolle prosequi order by the local US Attorney&rsquo;s office, but it was not until the fall of 1977 that the FBI discovered that the bomb threats had been staged by the Guardian&rsquo;s Office. A contemporary memorandum sent between two Guardian&rsquo;s Office staff noted on a list of jobs successfully accomplished: &ldquo;Conspired to entrap Mrs. Lovely into being arrested for a felony which she did not commit. She was arraigned for the crime.&rdquo;</p></div><p>This wouldn't be the first time they have falsely accused somebody of death threats, as well as being adept in sending their own.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Operation Freakout [ wikipedia.org ] : Cooper counter-sued on March 30 , 1972 , demanding $ 15.4 million in damages for the ongoing harassment .
However , the Church stepped up the harassment , for instance painting her name and phone number on street walls so that she would receive obscene phone calls , and subscribing her to pornographic mailing lists .
She also received anonymous death threats and her neighbors received letters claiming that she had a venereal disease.In December 1972 , a woman ostensibly soliciting funds for United Farm Workers stole a quantity of stationery from Cooper    s apartment .
A few days later , the New York Church of Scientology    received    two anonymous bomb threats .
The following May , Cooper was indicted for making the bomb threats and arraigned for a Federal grand jury .
The threats had been written on her stationery , which was marked with her fingerprints.The charges were eventually dropped in 1975 with the filing of a Nolle prosequi order by the local US Attorney    s office , but it was not until the fall of 1977 that the FBI discovered that the bomb threats had been staged by the Guardian    s Office .
A contemporary memorandum sent between two Guardian    s Office staff noted on a list of jobs successfully accomplished :    Conspired to entrap Mrs. Lovely into being arrested for a felony which she did not commit .
She was arraigned for the crime.    This would n't be the first time they have falsely accused somebody of death threats , as well as being adept in sending their own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Operation Freakout [wikipedia.org]:Cooper counter-sued on March 30, 1972, demanding $15.4 million in damages for the ongoing harassment.
However, the Church stepped up the harassment, for instance painting her name and phone number on street walls so that she would receive obscene phone calls, and subscribing her to pornographic mailing lists.
She also received anonymous death threats and her neighbors received letters claiming that she had a venereal disease.In December 1972, a woman ostensibly soliciting funds for United Farm Workers stole a quantity of stationery from Cooper’s apartment.
A few days later, the New York Church of Scientology “received” two anonymous bomb threats.
The following May, Cooper was indicted for making the bomb threats and arraigned for a Federal grand jury.
The threats had been written on her stationery, which was marked with her fingerprints.The charges were eventually dropped in 1975 with the filing of a Nolle prosequi order by the local US Attorney’s office, but it was not until the fall of 1977 that the FBI discovered that the bomb threats had been staged by the Guardian’s Office.
A contemporary memorandum sent between two Guardian’s Office staff noted on a list of jobs successfully accomplished: “Conspired to entrap Mrs. Lovely into being arrested for a felony which she did not commit.
She was arraigned for the crime.”This wouldn't be the first time they have falsely accused somebody of death threats, as well as being adept in sending their own.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216556</id>
	<title>Poking a stick at the beehive..</title>
	<author>greywire</author>
	<datestamp>1259090340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Scientology has harassed and annoyed them with Millions of phone calls, millions of mailed brochures, censoring websites or any thing else they see that doesn't make them money, acts of vandalism against, threats, and death threats against former Church members and non members."</p><p>There, fixed that for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Scientology has harassed and annoyed them with Millions of phone calls , millions of mailed brochures , censoring websites or any thing else they see that does n't make them money , acts of vandalism against , threats , and death threats against former Church members and non members .
" There , fixed that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Scientology has harassed and annoyed them with Millions of phone calls, millions of mailed brochures, censoring websites or any thing else they see that doesn't make them money, acts of vandalism against, threats, and death threats against former Church members and non members.
"There, fixed that for you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216812</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259091660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types.</i></p><p>Are they? You have evidence of this? Also, even if it were true (it may be, or it may not) freedom of information is like freedom of speech. I'm free to speak, but I have no right to make you listen.</p><p>Few if any advocates of free speech advocate freedom to slander, or otherwise maliciously harm ("Fire" in a crowded theater).</p><p><i>As to DDoS attacks, how many times are you allowed to knock on a church's door before it becomes illegal?</i></p><p>Freedom of speech isn't freedom to be a nuisance. If I answer my door and tell you "no thanks, I don't want a vacuum cleaner" and you knock again, I'll have you arrested for trespass.</p><p>My right to swing my arm ends where your nose begins. Rights go both ways.</p><p><i> Once you allow the government to ban heroin, you give them jurisdiction over your body that will become more and more intrusive.</i></p><p>WTF does that have to do with the argument? If you're wondering why you were modded "troll", look up slashdot's definition of troll. It's in the FAQ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the " information wants to be free " types.Are they ?
You have evidence of this ?
Also , even if it were true ( it may be , or it may not ) freedom of information is like freedom of speech .
I 'm free to speak , but I have no right to make you listen.Few if any advocates of free speech advocate freedom to slander , or otherwise maliciously harm ( " Fire " in a crowded theater ) .As to DDoS attacks , how many times are you allowed to knock on a church 's door before it becomes illegal ? Freedom of speech is n't freedom to be a nuisance .
If I answer my door and tell you " no thanks , I do n't want a vacuum cleaner " and you knock again , I 'll have you arrested for trespass.My right to swing my arm ends where your nose begins .
Rights go both ways .
Once you allow the government to ban heroin , you give them jurisdiction over your body that will become more and more intrusive.WTF does that have to do with the argument ?
If you 're wondering why you were modded " troll " , look up slashdot 's definition of troll .
It 's in the FAQ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types.Are they?
You have evidence of this?
Also, even if it were true (it may be, or it may not) freedom of information is like freedom of speech.
I'm free to speak, but I have no right to make you listen.Few if any advocates of free speech advocate freedom to slander, or otherwise maliciously harm ("Fire" in a crowded theater).As to DDoS attacks, how many times are you allowed to knock on a church's door before it becomes illegal?Freedom of speech isn't freedom to be a nuisance.
If I answer my door and tell you "no thanks, I don't want a vacuum cleaner" and you knock again, I'll have you arrested for trespass.My right to swing my arm ends where your nose begins.
Rights go both ways.
Once you allow the government to ban heroin, you give them jurisdiction over your body that will become more and more intrusive.WTF does that have to do with the argument?
If you're wondering why you were modded "troll", look up slashdot's definition of troll.
It's in the FAQ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219154</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Nethead</author>
	<datestamp>1259059320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hate to let the steam out of your engine, but your e-mailbox does not exist as a physical entity.  It's just a collection of magnetic states in a virtual environment (kind of like your bank account.)  I'm not sure what this thing is you actually think you own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hate to let the steam out of your engine , but your e-mailbox does not exist as a physical entity .
It 's just a collection of magnetic states in a virtual environment ( kind of like your bank account .
) I 'm not sure what this thing is you actually think you own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hate to let the steam out of your engine, but your e-mailbox does not exist as a physical entity.
It's just a collection of magnetic states in a virtual environment (kind of like your bank account.
)  I'm not sure what this thing is you actually think you own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216382</id>
	<title>Fighting monsters</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259089440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Nineteen year old Dmitriy Guzner, Anonymous member and Scientology DDoS attacker, received one year and one day in jail for his admitted crime. His sentence could have been a maximum ten years. According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.'"</p></div></blockquote><p>He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.<br>--Friedrich Nietzsche</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Nineteen year old Dmitriy Guzner , Anonymous member and Scientology DDoS attacker , received one year and one day in jail for his admitted crime .
His sentence could have been a maximum ten years .
According to the Church of Scientology , Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls , 3.6 million e-mails , 141 million hits on its website , ten acts of vandalism against its property , 22 bomb threats , and eight death threats against Church leaders .
' " He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.--Friedrich Nietzsche</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Nineteen year old Dmitriy Guzner, Anonymous member and Scientology DDoS attacker, received one year and one day in jail for his admitted crime.
His sentence could have been a maximum ten years.
According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.
'"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.--Friedrich Nietzsche
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215578</id>
	<title>Church of Scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259085720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Scientology members complaining about being harassed is like Mormons bitching about missionaries knocking on their doors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Scientology members complaining about being harassed is like Mormons bitching about missionaries knocking on their doors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Scientology members complaining about being harassed is like Mormons bitching about missionaries knocking on their doors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219252</id>
	<title>Catholicism a Cult?</title>
	<author>woolio</author>
	<datestamp>1259059800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was born and raised Catholic.  Went to Catholic schools.     The parent poster brings up some interesting points.</p><p>While many people may agree Scientology is a cult, I suggest we all look inward:</p><p><b>People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;</b><br>Early Christian followers were threatened, beaten, etc.</p><p><b>Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;</b><br>Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.</p><p><b>They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;</b><br>Jesus is  said to have unconditional love for all people.</p><p><b>They get a new identity based on the group;</b><br>Followers of Jesus are no longer Jews, Pagans, etc... They are known as Christians.</p><p><b>They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled. </b><br>The 4 gospels were all pretty much copied from the same source (and long after Jesus died).  Each one has a different audience, but the content is largely the same. In this sense, followers have restricted access to information.  The Catholic church also regulates which scriptures form the Bible (and which do not).   Not all writings of the Dead Sea scrolls made it into the Bible.  Throughout time, religion have been used as a means to divide people.  In the past, those who have questioned the religious leadership have been excommunicated, or worse...</p><p>Even today, try being a Catholic and marrying a non-Catholic in a Church.  It is not allowed!  The meaning of "Catholic" (as welcoming) only applies to their Cathechism school!</p><p>(People may argue that the Catholic Church is no longer a cult, even if there is strong evidence for it being a cult at one time.  So I ask you, did the religion change or did society change around it? If you think it is now no longer a cult, does that make you feel better?)</p><p><b>From everything I've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology, they do all of those things.</b><br>From everything I have read and know about Catholicism, they do and/or have done all those things.</p><p><b>Contrast that to say...Judaism or Islam, theres a big difference.</b><br>Indeed, the other religions spell their name differently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was born and raised Catholic .
Went to Catholic schools .
The parent poster brings up some interesting points.While many people may agree Scientology is a cult , I suggest we all look inward : People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations ; Early Christian followers were threatened , beaten , etc.Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation , which is repeatedly emphasized ; Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice ' sake , for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.They receive unconditional love , acceptance , and attention from a charismatic leader ; Jesus is said to have unconditional love for all people.They get a new identity based on the group ; Followers of Jesus are no longer Jews , Pagans , etc... They are known as Christians.They are subject to entrapment ( isolation from friends , relatives , and the mainstream culture ) and their access to information is severely controlled .
The 4 gospels were all pretty much copied from the same source ( and long after Jesus died ) .
Each one has a different audience , but the content is largely the same .
In this sense , followers have restricted access to information .
The Catholic church also regulates which scriptures form the Bible ( and which do not ) .
Not all writings of the Dead Sea scrolls made it into the Bible .
Throughout time , religion have been used as a means to divide people .
In the past , those who have questioned the religious leadership have been excommunicated , or worse...Even today , try being a Catholic and marrying a non-Catholic in a Church .
It is not allowed !
The meaning of " Catholic " ( as welcoming ) only applies to their Cathechism school !
( People may argue that the Catholic Church is no longer a cult , even if there is strong evidence for it being a cult at one time .
So I ask you , did the religion change or did society change around it ?
If you think it is now no longer a cult , does that make you feel better ?
) From everything I 've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology , they do all of those things.From everything I have read and know about Catholicism , they do and/or have done all those things.Contrast that to say...Judaism or Islam , theres a big difference.Indeed , the other religions spell their name differently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was born and raised Catholic.
Went to Catholic schools.
The parent poster brings up some interesting points.While many people may agree Scientology is a cult, I suggest we all look inward:People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;Early Christian followers were threatened, beaten, etc.Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;Jesus is  said to have unconditional love for all people.They get a new identity based on the group;Followers of Jesus are no longer Jews, Pagans, etc... They are known as Christians.They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.
The 4 gospels were all pretty much copied from the same source (and long after Jesus died).
Each one has a different audience, but the content is largely the same.
In this sense, followers have restricted access to information.
The Catholic church also regulates which scriptures form the Bible (and which do not).
Not all writings of the Dead Sea scrolls made it into the Bible.
Throughout time, religion have been used as a means to divide people.
In the past, those who have questioned the religious leadership have been excommunicated, or worse...Even today, try being a Catholic and marrying a non-Catholic in a Church.
It is not allowed!
The meaning of "Catholic" (as welcoming) only applies to their Cathechism school!
(People may argue that the Catholic Church is no longer a cult, even if there is strong evidence for it being a cult at one time.
So I ask you, did the religion change or did society change around it?
If you think it is now no longer a cult, does that make you feel better?
)From everything I've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology, they do all of those things.From everything I have read and know about Catholicism, they do and/or have done all those things.Contrast that to say...Judaism or Islam, theres a big difference.Indeed, the other religions spell their name differently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216424</id>
	<title>Anonymous is winning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259089620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anonymous has done a lot since the early days of prank calls and whatnot.  The legal protests as well as other actions by Anonymous (also legal) have delivered a crushing and unprecedented blow to Scientology.  Anon has probably done more to fuck them over than even the FBI did at the end of the 1970's.  Now because of Anon, there is massive negative media coverage of the scilons.  Hollywood is rebelling against them and more and more celebs are walking away or saying no.  And on top of all that, now the Australian government is taking a hard look at Scientology as a criminal organization with a Senator actually denouncing them in open Parmiment.  Anonymous has enabled many ex-scientologists to speak out as well as family of those still inside to seek communication with their loved ones without fear of reprisal.  Anonymous enabled this by breaking the back of Scientology's Office of Special Affairs and has them so tied up, they can't prioritize which targets to go after and have lost their effectiveness almost entirely.

After nearly 2 years of this, only one conviction against an anon and for a lowly DDOS attack that happened in the early few weeks of the movement is a testament to how good Anonymous is at staying within the law.  Sure it may cut out some form of lulz, but we have found that action against the Scientologists that hurts them but leaves us legally untouchable generates way more lulz because it leaves them no lawful recourse against us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous has done a lot since the early days of prank calls and whatnot .
The legal protests as well as other actions by Anonymous ( also legal ) have delivered a crushing and unprecedented blow to Scientology .
Anon has probably done more to fuck them over than even the FBI did at the end of the 1970 's .
Now because of Anon , there is massive negative media coverage of the scilons .
Hollywood is rebelling against them and more and more celebs are walking away or saying no .
And on top of all that , now the Australian government is taking a hard look at Scientology as a criminal organization with a Senator actually denouncing them in open Parmiment .
Anonymous has enabled many ex-scientologists to speak out as well as family of those still inside to seek communication with their loved ones without fear of reprisal .
Anonymous enabled this by breaking the back of Scientology 's Office of Special Affairs and has them so tied up , they ca n't prioritize which targets to go after and have lost their effectiveness almost entirely .
After nearly 2 years of this , only one conviction against an anon and for a lowly DDOS attack that happened in the early few weeks of the movement is a testament to how good Anonymous is at staying within the law .
Sure it may cut out some form of lulz , but we have found that action against the Scientologists that hurts them but leaves us legally untouchable generates way more lulz because it leaves them no lawful recourse against us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous has done a lot since the early days of prank calls and whatnot.
The legal protests as well as other actions by Anonymous (also legal) have delivered a crushing and unprecedented blow to Scientology.
Anon has probably done more to fuck them over than even the FBI did at the end of the 1970's.
Now because of Anon, there is massive negative media coverage of the scilons.
Hollywood is rebelling against them and more and more celebs are walking away or saying no.
And on top of all that, now the Australian government is taking a hard look at Scientology as a criminal organization with a Senator actually denouncing them in open Parmiment.
Anonymous has enabled many ex-scientologists to speak out as well as family of those still inside to seek communication with their loved ones without fear of reprisal.
Anonymous enabled this by breaking the back of Scientology's Office of Special Affairs and has them so tied up, they can't prioritize which targets to go after and have lost their effectiveness almost entirely.
After nearly 2 years of this, only one conviction against an anon and for a lowly DDOS attack that happened in the early few weeks of the movement is a testament to how good Anonymous is at staying within the law.
Sure it may cut out some form of lulz, but we have found that action against the Scientologists that hurts them but leaves us legally untouchable generates way more lulz because it leaves them no lawful recourse against us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215716</id>
	<title>"And a partridge in a pear tree!"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259086260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism , 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.</p><p>1.1 GOLDEN YEARS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>8,139 threatening phone calls , 3.6 million e-mails , 141 million hits on its website , ten acts of vandalism , 22 bomb threats , and eight death threats against Church leaders.1.1 GOLDEN YEARS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism , 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.1.1 GOLDEN YEARS!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216086</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259088180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the spam issue: it still seems like the best solution is not to attack the senders (there will always be more if there's $$$ to be made) but rather to attack the recipients. Send out a couple million ads for cheap dick pills, and mail the "customers" cyanide tablets. "Thin the herd", as the hunters say.</p><p>One would assume that after the first hundred or so people died that ordering prescriptions from dodgy outfits in spam mail would be a little less popular...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the spam issue : it still seems like the best solution is not to attack the senders ( there will always be more if there 's $ $ $ to be made ) but rather to attack the recipients .
Send out a couple million ads for cheap dick pills , and mail the " customers " cyanide tablets .
" Thin the herd " , as the hunters say.One would assume that after the first hundred or so people died that ordering prescriptions from dodgy outfits in spam mail would be a little less popular.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the spam issue: it still seems like the best solution is not to attack the senders (there will always be more if there's $$$ to be made) but rather to attack the recipients.
Send out a couple million ads for cheap dick pills, and mail the "customers" cyanide tablets.
"Thin the herd", as the hunters say.One would assume that after the first hundred or so people died that ordering prescriptions from dodgy outfits in spam mail would be a little less popular...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215898</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259087280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Legislating against spam has nothing to do with free speech whatsoever. It has everything to do with poisoning the commons. If we, as a society, can enact laws saying it is illegal for a mining company to dump 10,000 litres of cyanide into a river, then we can also enact laws saying it is illegal for Alan Ralsky to dump ten billion rolex spams into the world's routing hardware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Legislating against spam has nothing to do with free speech whatsoever .
It has everything to do with poisoning the commons .
If we , as a society , can enact laws saying it is illegal for a mining company to dump 10,000 litres of cyanide into a river , then we can also enact laws saying it is illegal for Alan Ralsky to dump ten billion rolex spams into the world 's routing hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Legislating against spam has nothing to do with free speech whatsoever.
It has everything to do with poisoning the commons.
If we, as a society, can enact laws saying it is illegal for a mining company to dump 10,000 litres of cyanide into a river, then we can also enact laws saying it is illegal for Alan Ralsky to dump ten billion rolex spams into the world's routing hardware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</id>
	<title>dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259086020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types. You can't have it both ways. Freedom of speech, freedom of data transmission also applies to hawkers of Viiagr11a and c1la15!!) doesn't it? As to DDoS attacks, how many times are you allowed to knock on a church's door before it becomes illegal? Though you might agree with this particular case, it opens up the door for more intrusive precedents. Once you allow the government to ban heroin, you give them jurisdiction over your body that will become more and more intrusive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the " information wants to be free " types .
You ca n't have it both ways .
Freedom of speech , freedom of data transmission also applies to hawkers of Viiagr11a and c1la15 ! !
) does n't it ?
As to DDoS attacks , how many times are you allowed to knock on a church 's door before it becomes illegal ?
Though you might agree with this particular case , it opens up the door for more intrusive precedents .
Once you allow the government to ban heroin , you give them jurisdiction over your body that will become more and more intrusive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types.
You can't have it both ways.
Freedom of speech, freedom of data transmission also applies to hawkers of Viiagr11a and c1la15!!
) doesn't it?
As to DDoS attacks, how many times are you allowed to knock on a church's door before it becomes illegal?
Though you might agree with this particular case, it opens up the door for more intrusive precedents.
Once you allow the government to ban heroin, you give them jurisdiction over your body that will become more and more intrusive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215806</id>
	<title>In Defense of Anonymous...</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1259086800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...Never gonna give you up!</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Never gon na give you up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Never gonna give you up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219706</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259061840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the bigger difference is, if you look at any real religion, they will very willingly give you access to all the churches teachings.  Heck, most of them will gladly give you a copy of their holy books so you can learn about it if interested.</p><p>These schemers hide their 'religion' and make you pay to take 'courses' before you can learn most of what their beliefs really are.  It's a scam, not just a cult.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the bigger difference is , if you look at any real religion , they will very willingly give you access to all the churches teachings .
Heck , most of them will gladly give you a copy of their holy books so you can learn about it if interested.These schemers hide their 'religion ' and make you pay to take 'courses ' before you can learn most of what their beliefs really are .
It 's a scam , not just a cult .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the bigger difference is, if you look at any real religion, they will very willingly give you access to all the churches teachings.
Heck, most of them will gladly give you a copy of their holy books so you can learn about it if interested.These schemers hide their 'religion' and make you pay to take 'courses' before you can learn most of what their beliefs really are.
It's a scam, not just a cult.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30232734</id>
	<title>Re:Church of Scientology</title>
	<author>Rakarra</author>
	<datestamp>1257172440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the DoS here stands for "Denial of Scientology", I'd say it's <i>fair game.</i> </p></div><p>Haha, that was beautiful.</p><p>(Italics added)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the DoS here stands for " Denial of Scientology " , I 'd say it 's fair game .
Haha , that was beautiful .
( Italics added )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the DoS here stands for "Denial of Scientology", I'd say it's fair game.
Haha, that was beautiful.
(Italics added)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30222402</id>
	<title>Re:Co$ are a bunch of whiny hypocrites!</title>
	<author>sowth</author>
	<datestamp>1259079600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever asshole. <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1452090&amp;threshold=1&amp;commentsort=1&amp;mode=thread&amp;cid=30180024" title="slashdot.org">You are the one who wants people like them to have control of your computer.</a> [slashdot.org]

</p><p>I'm sure one of the criteria for <a href="http://idolator.com/5225572/the-downward-spiral-apparently-too-hot-for-the-itunes-store" title="idolator.com">rejecting iPhone apps</a> [idolator.com] would be anything which would piss off a "religious" organization, especially one as aggressive as them. So letting the CoS have say over what you do with a computer is "not oppressive or abusive." Is it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever asshole .
You are the one who wants people like them to have control of your computer .
[ slashdot.org ] I 'm sure one of the criteria for rejecting iPhone apps [ idolator.com ] would be anything which would piss off a " religious " organization , especially one as aggressive as them .
So letting the CoS have say over what you do with a computer is " not oppressive or abusive .
" Is it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever asshole.
You are the one who wants people like them to have control of your computer.
[slashdot.org]

I'm sure one of the criteria for rejecting iPhone apps [idolator.com] would be anything which would piss off a "religious" organization, especially one as aggressive as them.
So letting the CoS have say over what you do with a computer is "not oppressive or abusive.
" Is it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216134</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>H0p313ss</author>
	<datestamp>1259088420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this was irony it was brilliant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this was irony it was brilliant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this was irony it was brilliant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864</id>
	<title>scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259087160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext> is not a church.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is not a church .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> is not a church.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215840</id>
	<title>Which wormhole did I fall through?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259087040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is it freedom of religion is so sacred in these modern times? It's the 21st century already and we still let these lunatics preach their thought control?</p><p>No one should go to jail for such an altruistic effort as shutting down a cult. Janet Reno and her cronies killed 76 people just like the ones these guys harassed and didn't see a day in jail. These guys make some threats and they all do time? The whole thing would be laughable if it weren't eerily true.</p><p>I'm sure the religious nuts that frequent<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. will mod me down. It's ok. You probably lost control of your thoughts at an early age, when your parents forced it on you, so I don't hold you accountable.</p><p>Peace and love.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it freedom of religion is so sacred in these modern times ?
It 's the 21st century already and we still let these lunatics preach their thought control ? No one should go to jail for such an altruistic effort as shutting down a cult .
Janet Reno and her cronies killed 76 people just like the ones these guys harassed and did n't see a day in jail .
These guys make some threats and they all do time ?
The whole thing would be laughable if it were n't eerily true.I 'm sure the religious nuts that frequent / .
will mod me down .
It 's ok. You probably lost control of your thoughts at an early age , when your parents forced it on you , so I do n't hold you accountable.Peace and love .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it freedom of religion is so sacred in these modern times?
It's the 21st century already and we still let these lunatics preach their thought control?No one should go to jail for such an altruistic effort as shutting down a cult.
Janet Reno and her cronies killed 76 people just like the ones these guys harassed and didn't see a day in jail.
These guys make some threats and they all do time?
The whole thing would be laughable if it weren't eerily true.I'm sure the religious nuts that frequent /.
will mod me down.
It's ok. You probably lost control of your thoughts at an early age, when your parents forced it on you, so I don't hold you accountable.Peace and love.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217160</id>
	<title>Re:Ralsky's the guy that Slashdot spammed...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259093340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In case anyone is interested, there's an online video of an interesting talk given by US Attorney Terrence Berg about the investigation and prosecution of the Ralsky case:</p><p><a href="http://safecomputing.umich.edu/events/sumit09/#Berg" title="umich.edu" rel="nofollow">Terrence Berg's info &amp; links to the presentation</a> [umich.edu]</p><p>I think it provides insight into how they have to approach these kinds of cases, and how difficult it can be to go from "knowing" someone is violating anti-spam laws to getting the right kind of evidence to "prove" that someone is doing something illegal.  It was also kind of fun to hear about some of the details before they became public (I think the video may still have those parts edited out, though).</p><p>The talk was at this year's SUMIT conference at the University of Michigan, an annual one-day information security event that brings in some great speakers (I've been to all of them, and I think this year's was the best so far).  All of the talks are online:</p><p><a href="http://safecomputing.umich.edu/events/sumit09/" title="umich.edu" rel="nofollow">SUMIT\_09 Videos</a> [umich.edu]</p><p>If you have time, check out Moxie Marlinspike's talk about SSL and Alex Halderman's talk on the cold boot attacks (this isn't particularly new stuff, but I thought the talks were very entertaining and interesting).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In case anyone is interested , there 's an online video of an interesting talk given by US Attorney Terrence Berg about the investigation and prosecution of the Ralsky case : Terrence Berg 's info &amp; links to the presentation [ umich.edu ] I think it provides insight into how they have to approach these kinds of cases , and how difficult it can be to go from " knowing " someone is violating anti-spam laws to getting the right kind of evidence to " prove " that someone is doing something illegal .
It was also kind of fun to hear about some of the details before they became public ( I think the video may still have those parts edited out , though ) .The talk was at this year 's SUMIT conference at the University of Michigan , an annual one-day information security event that brings in some great speakers ( I 've been to all of them , and I think this year 's was the best so far ) .
All of the talks are online : SUMIT \ _09 Videos [ umich.edu ] If you have time , check out Moxie Marlinspike 's talk about SSL and Alex Halderman 's talk on the cold boot attacks ( this is n't particularly new stuff , but I thought the talks were very entertaining and interesting ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In case anyone is interested, there's an online video of an interesting talk given by US Attorney Terrence Berg about the investigation and prosecution of the Ralsky case:Terrence Berg's info &amp; links to the presentation [umich.edu]I think it provides insight into how they have to approach these kinds of cases, and how difficult it can be to go from "knowing" someone is violating anti-spam laws to getting the right kind of evidence to "prove" that someone is doing something illegal.
It was also kind of fun to hear about some of the details before they became public (I think the video may still have those parts edited out, though).The talk was at this year's SUMIT conference at the University of Michigan, an annual one-day information security event that brings in some great speakers (I've been to all of them, and I think this year's was the best so far).
All of the talks are online:SUMIT\_09 Videos [umich.edu]If you have time, check out Moxie Marlinspike's talk about SSL and Alex Halderman's talk on the cold boot attacks (this isn't particularly new stuff, but I thought the talks were very entertaining and interesting).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217092</id>
	<title>Re:Scientology is not a religion!</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1259092920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I disagree -- Scientology is a religion in the truest sense of the word -- it is based on a book of poorly written fiction with no basis in reality and serves only to inhibit the thoughts and emotions of followers, while bilking them out of their hard earned income and simultaneously using its status as a religion to demand respect that it doesn't deserve. What more could you ask of an organized religion?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree -- Scientology is a religion in the truest sense of the word -- it is based on a book of poorly written fiction with no basis in reality and serves only to inhibit the thoughts and emotions of followers , while bilking them out of their hard earned income and simultaneously using its status as a religion to demand respect that it does n't deserve .
What more could you ask of an organized religion ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree -- Scientology is a religion in the truest sense of the word -- it is based on a book of poorly written fiction with no basis in reality and serves only to inhibit the thoughts and emotions of followers, while bilking them out of their hard earned income and simultaneously using its status as a religion to demand respect that it doesn't deserve.
What more could you ask of an organized religion?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216050</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>A beautiful mind</author>
	<datestamp>1259088060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Scientology is an efficient church. They are focusing on what a church usually does: scamming people out of their money and scamming them for control.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Scientology is an efficient church .
They are focusing on what a church usually does : scamming people out of their money and scamming them for control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Scientology is an efficient church.
They are focusing on what a church usually does: scamming people out of their money and scamming them for control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217150</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1259093280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Forget this whole debate about whether or not scientology is a legit religion -- we should instead use this absurdity as a  jumping off point in the debate over religion in our society. Is there any particular reason that religion ought to have the protected status that it does? Why are religions even tax exempt in the first place? Why do we feel that it is okay to label children with their parents' religion? These are the sorts of questions we should be asking. I honestly can't see how the dark lord Xenu is any more absurd than a talking snake in a tree, but I do see it as a good sign that people everywhere fully recognize the absurdity of scientology. We simply need to take it one step further.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget this whole debate about whether or not scientology is a legit religion -- we should instead use this absurdity as a jumping off point in the debate over religion in our society .
Is there any particular reason that religion ought to have the protected status that it does ?
Why are religions even tax exempt in the first place ?
Why do we feel that it is okay to label children with their parents ' religion ?
These are the sorts of questions we should be asking .
I honestly ca n't see how the dark lord Xenu is any more absurd than a talking snake in a tree , but I do see it as a good sign that people everywhere fully recognize the absurdity of scientology .
We simply need to take it one step further .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget this whole debate about whether or not scientology is a legit religion -- we should instead use this absurdity as a  jumping off point in the debate over religion in our society.
Is there any particular reason that religion ought to have the protected status that it does?
Why are religions even tax exempt in the first place?
Why do we feel that it is okay to label children with their parents' religion?
These are the sorts of questions we should be asking.
I honestly can't see how the dark lord Xenu is any more absurd than a talking snake in a tree, but I do see it as a good sign that people everywhere fully recognize the absurdity of scientology.
We simply need to take it one step further.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30221430</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259071200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Cult" is such a relative term. I know some people who's interpretation of Christianity is cult-like, whereas others practice in a more compatible method that doesn't annoy the hell out of everyone around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Cult " is such a relative term .
I know some people who 's interpretation of Christianity is cult-like , whereas others practice in a more compatible method that does n't annoy the hell out of everyone around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Cult" is such a relative term.
I know some people who's interpretation of Christianity is cult-like, whereas others practice in a more compatible method that doesn't annoy the hell out of everyone around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215654</id>
	<title>Ralsky's the guy that Slashdot spammed...</title>
	<author>douglips</author>
	<datestamp>1259086020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He took it right in the ass. It was beautiful.</p><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/06/1554227" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/06/1554227</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He took it right in the ass .
It was beautiful.http : //slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 02/12/06/1554227 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He took it right in the ass.
It was beautiful.http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/06/1554227 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218358</id>
	<title>Why is anyone believing Scientologists?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259055900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article says, "According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and [blah blah]".  This is stated uncritically, with no attempt to determine if it's true or not, even though Scientology has been found over and over again (by both journalists and court systems) to be a criminal conspiracy to steal money from credulous believers.</p><p>A good journalist would have actually researched Scientology's claims and almost certainly would have determined that they were fabricated and inflated to make Scientology look like it was under massive attack, rather than being annoyed by occasional teenage Anonymouses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article says , " According to the Church of Scientology , Anonymous has harassed and [ blah blah ] " .
This is stated uncritically , with no attempt to determine if it 's true or not , even though Scientology has been found over and over again ( by both journalists and court systems ) to be a criminal conspiracy to steal money from credulous believers.A good journalist would have actually researched Scientology 's claims and almost certainly would have determined that they were fabricated and inflated to make Scientology look like it was under massive attack , rather than being annoyed by occasional teenage Anonymouses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article says, "According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and [blah blah]".
This is stated uncritically, with no attempt to determine if it's true or not, even though Scientology has been found over and over again (by both journalists and court systems) to be a criminal conspiracy to steal money from credulous believers.A good journalist would have actually researched Scientology's claims and almost certainly would have determined that they were fabricated and inflated to make Scientology look like it was under massive attack, rather than being annoyed by occasional teenage Anonymouses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215828</id>
	<title>Anonymous Member?</title>
	<author>Jack Malmostoso</author>
	<datestamp>1259086980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rules 1 &amp; 2, buddy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rules 1 &amp; 2 , buddy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rules 1 &amp; 2, buddy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Lord Ender</author>
	<datestamp>1259087820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who gave you the ability to decide that, the Pope?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who gave you the ability to decide that , the Pope ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who gave you the ability to decide that, the Pope?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215804</id>
	<title>I know what the guy did is wrong...</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1259086800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But Scientology is just pure evil.  I can't help but sympathize even if I can't condone.  I have mixed feelings though...no one should have their lives threatened...but another part of me thinks Scientologists kind of deserve it because of the suffering they cause.  Very confusing.  It would all be easier if people didn't like and exploit each other.  Too bad that will never happen in my life time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But Scientology is just pure evil .
I ca n't help but sympathize even if I ca n't condone .
I have mixed feelings though...no one should have their lives threatened...but another part of me thinks Scientologists kind of deserve it because of the suffering they cause .
Very confusing .
It would all be easier if people did n't like and exploit each other .
Too bad that will never happen in my life time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But Scientology is just pure evil.
I can't help but sympathize even if I can't condone.
I have mixed feelings though...no one should have their lives threatened...but another part of me thinks Scientologists kind of deserve it because of the suffering they cause.
Very confusing.
It would all be easier if people didn't like and exploit each other.
Too bad that will never happen in my life time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218010</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259054160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to say "only on slashdot is a completely ignorant comment be modded +2 insightful", but clicking on the "reply button" I see it was remodded as troll. Good job, mods!</p><p>I don't often go to church, but I've been to very many different denominations of Christian churces and have yet to have any of them attempt to scam me out of money. They pass the collection plate around, but nobody ever coerces or forces or shames anyone into putting money into it. In fact, many if not most churches have "food pantries" where the poor can come for food. You don't have to have a penny in your pocket to go to a real church.</p><p>Your only contact with religion appears to be the TV evangelists. These are NOT Christian churches; they are indeed scams. They're easy to spot, as well.</p><ul> <li>The preacher wears a four thousand dollar suit. I've never been to a real church with a rich preacher. Pat Robertson has converted more Christians to athiesm than all the athiests at slashdot combined.</li><li>Huge multimillion dollar facility. "The love of money is the root of all evil". Read the actual Bible to see what Jesus has to say about money. If you're rich, read it and weep. If you worship money you're not worshiping God.</li><li>A political bias, particularly a right-wing political bias in sermons. You rarely see this in a real church.</li><li>The congregation is all white, or all black, maybe with a token member of another race.</li><li>The preacher will sell prayer in return for money. The Catholic church's priests have been guilty of this in the past, and is what caused Martin Luther to act and start the Reformation. You can't buy your way into heaven</li><li>The preacher will condemn some group, such as gays, for their behavior. "Judge not, lest you be judged yourself". I find it hypoctitically ironic that a clean-shaven preacher will bash gays, when the Bible clearly states that making yourself look like a woman is a sin -- and what would be more "making yourself look like a woman" than removing a secondary sexual characteristic? Before you try to remove the mote from your brother's eye, first remove the plank from your own.</li></ul><p>Christianity is about love and eternal life, not death and hatred and hell. Any preacher who rallies for war is a wolf in sheep's clothing. In fact, if you read the bible you'll find that athiests don't go to hell -- it agrees with the athiests that athiests die when they die. Only Christians who willfully rebel against God go to hell; their sins are forgiven. Jesus paid the price for Christians' sins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to say " only on slashdot is a completely ignorant comment be modded + 2 insightful " , but clicking on the " reply button " I see it was remodded as troll .
Good job , mods ! I do n't often go to church , but I 've been to very many different denominations of Christian churces and have yet to have any of them attempt to scam me out of money .
They pass the collection plate around , but nobody ever coerces or forces or shames anyone into putting money into it .
In fact , many if not most churches have " food pantries " where the poor can come for food .
You do n't have to have a penny in your pocket to go to a real church.Your only contact with religion appears to be the TV evangelists .
These are NOT Christian churches ; they are indeed scams .
They 're easy to spot , as well .
The preacher wears a four thousand dollar suit .
I 've never been to a real church with a rich preacher .
Pat Robertson has converted more Christians to athiesm than all the athiests at slashdot combined.Huge multimillion dollar facility .
" The love of money is the root of all evil " .
Read the actual Bible to see what Jesus has to say about money .
If you 're rich , read it and weep .
If you worship money you 're not worshiping God.A political bias , particularly a right-wing political bias in sermons .
You rarely see this in a real church.The congregation is all white , or all black , maybe with a token member of another race.The preacher will sell prayer in return for money .
The Catholic church 's priests have been guilty of this in the past , and is what caused Martin Luther to act and start the Reformation .
You ca n't buy your way into heavenThe preacher will condemn some group , such as gays , for their behavior .
" Judge not , lest you be judged yourself " .
I find it hypoctitically ironic that a clean-shaven preacher will bash gays , when the Bible clearly states that making yourself look like a woman is a sin -- and what would be more " making yourself look like a woman " than removing a secondary sexual characteristic ?
Before you try to remove the mote from your brother 's eye , first remove the plank from your own.Christianity is about love and eternal life , not death and hatred and hell .
Any preacher who rallies for war is a wolf in sheep 's clothing .
In fact , if you read the bible you 'll find that athiests do n't go to hell -- it agrees with the athiests that athiests die when they die .
Only Christians who willfully rebel against God go to hell ; their sins are forgiven .
Jesus paid the price for Christians ' sins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to say "only on slashdot is a completely ignorant comment be modded +2 insightful", but clicking on the "reply button" I see it was remodded as troll.
Good job, mods!I don't often go to church, but I've been to very many different denominations of Christian churces and have yet to have any of them attempt to scam me out of money.
They pass the collection plate around, but nobody ever coerces or forces or shames anyone into putting money into it.
In fact, many if not most churches have "food pantries" where the poor can come for food.
You don't have to have a penny in your pocket to go to a real church.Your only contact with religion appears to be the TV evangelists.
These are NOT Christian churches; they are indeed scams.
They're easy to spot, as well.
The preacher wears a four thousand dollar suit.
I've never been to a real church with a rich preacher.
Pat Robertson has converted more Christians to athiesm than all the athiests at slashdot combined.Huge multimillion dollar facility.
"The love of money is the root of all evil".
Read the actual Bible to see what Jesus has to say about money.
If you're rich, read it and weep.
If you worship money you're not worshiping God.A political bias, particularly a right-wing political bias in sermons.
You rarely see this in a real church.The congregation is all white, or all black, maybe with a token member of another race.The preacher will sell prayer in return for money.
The Catholic church's priests have been guilty of this in the past, and is what caused Martin Luther to act and start the Reformation.
You can't buy your way into heavenThe preacher will condemn some group, such as gays, for their behavior.
"Judge not, lest you be judged yourself".
I find it hypoctitically ironic that a clean-shaven preacher will bash gays, when the Bible clearly states that making yourself look like a woman is a sin -- and what would be more "making yourself look like a woman" than removing a secondary sexual characteristic?
Before you try to remove the mote from your brother's eye, first remove the plank from your own.Christianity is about love and eternal life, not death and hatred and hell.
Any preacher who rallies for war is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
In fact, if you read the bible you'll find that athiests don't go to hell -- it agrees with the athiests that athiests die when they die.
Only Christians who willfully rebel against God go to hell; their sins are forgiven.
Jesus paid the price for Christians' sins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30225968</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257177720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) What?<br>2) No. There are thousands of lectures and millions of written words that comprise the Scientology religion.<br>3) Unconditional love? Umm no.<br>4) Haha no sorry... that doesn't happen.<br>5) Wow then how am I on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.?</p><p>Posts like this are great. Makes the anti-Scientology crowd look as silly as hardcore truthers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) What ? 2 ) No .
There are thousands of lectures and millions of written words that comprise the Scientology religion.3 ) Unconditional love ?
Umm no.4 ) Haha no sorry... that does n't happen.5 ) Wow then how am I on / .
? Posts like this are great .
Makes the anti-Scientology crowd look as silly as hardcore truthers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) What?2) No.
There are thousands of lectures and millions of written words that comprise the Scientology religion.3) Unconditional love?
Umm no.4) Haha no sorry... that doesn't happen.5) Wow then how am I on /.
?Posts like this are great.
Makes the anti-Scientology crowd look as silly as hardcore truthers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220114</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1259063760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if did not notice my userid, i live right next to the devil.  I get to hear all kinds of crazy things.  I need to move.</htmltext>
<tokenext>if did not notice my userid , i live right next to the devil .
I get to hear all kinds of crazy things .
I need to move .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if did not notice my userid, i live right next to the devil.
I get to hear all kinds of crazy things.
I need to move.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216988</id>
	<title>Re:Scientology is not a religion!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259092380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kind of like Christianity, Judaism, and all the rest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kind of like Christianity , Judaism , and all the rest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kind of like Christianity, Judaism, and all the rest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218128</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259054700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a person who was raised Catholic, I can tell you that your definition of a cult fits perfectly with Catholicism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a person who was raised Catholic , I can tell you that your definition of a cult fits perfectly with Catholicism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a person who was raised Catholic, I can tell you that your definition of a cult fits perfectly with Catholicism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220854</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>kuzb</author>
	<datestamp>1259067540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Congratulations.  You just described almost every religion on the planet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations .
You just described almost every religion on the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations.
You just described almost every religion on the planet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218202</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Dishevel</author>
	<datestamp>1259055120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you really not know the difference between transferring and copying data between people and purposefully shuting down someone you do not want to hear from? Attacks are attacks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you really not know the difference between transferring and copying data between people and purposefully shuting down someone you do not want to hear from ?
Attacks are attacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you really not know the difference between transferring and copying data between people and purposefully shuting down someone you do not want to hear from?
Attacks are attacks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30221890</id>
	<title>They may have chased me out of the neighborhood...</title>
	<author>Eggplant62</author>
	<datestamp>1259075100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But note that I'm free and clear with the photos still of Ralsky's house in my possession and Bradley and Ralsky are both in the can. I'm so sad for them both.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But note that I 'm free and clear with the photos still of Ralsky 's house in my possession and Bradley and Ralsky are both in the can .
I 'm so sad for them both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But note that I'm free and clear with the photos still of Ralsky's house in my possession and Bradley and Ralsky are both in the can.
I'm so sad for them both.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30232870</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous is winning</title>
	<author>Rakarra</author>
	<datestamp>1257173340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hollywood is rebelling against them and more and more celebs are walking away or saying no.</p></div><p>I'd like to hear more about this. Which prominent celebrities have walked away recently? The only thing I hear is Nicole Kidman may have left Tom Cruise because of his Scientology (and tendency to be fucking crazy) and Will Smith is probably going to become a Scientologist.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hollywood is rebelling against them and more and more celebs are walking away or saying no.I 'd like to hear more about this .
Which prominent celebrities have walked away recently ?
The only thing I hear is Nicole Kidman may have left Tom Cruise because of his Scientology ( and tendency to be fucking crazy ) and Will Smith is probably going to become a Scientologist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hollywood is rebelling against them and more and more celebs are walking away or saying no.I'd like to hear more about this.
Which prominent celebrities have walked away recently?
The only thing I hear is Nicole Kidman may have left Tom Cruise because of his Scientology (and tendency to be fucking crazy) and Will Smith is probably going to become a Scientologist.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215890</id>
	<title>Re:Church of Scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259087220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, but on the scale of evil bastards, I'd rather spammers get comeuppance than the scientologists. Especially if the spam included DoS attacks, hacking, and bomb threats. For most people, scientology is just a bad joke, but spammers are screwing with the everyday lives of pretty much everyone out there. And one year in jail is not enough disincentive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but on the scale of evil bastards , I 'd rather spammers get comeuppance than the scientologists .
Especially if the spam included DoS attacks , hacking , and bomb threats .
For most people , scientology is just a bad joke , but spammers are screwing with the everyday lives of pretty much everyone out there .
And one year in jail is not enough disincentive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but on the scale of evil bastards, I'd rather spammers get comeuppance than the scientologists.
Especially if the spam included DoS attacks, hacking, and bomb threats.
For most people, scientology is just a bad joke, but spammers are screwing with the everyday lives of pretty much everyone out there.
And one year in jail is not enough disincentive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216412</id>
	<title>Re:Church of Scientology</title>
	<author>Suzuran</author>
	<datestamp>1259089620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Spamming didn't murder Lisa McPherson.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spamming did n't murder Lisa McPherson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spamming didn't murder Lisa McPherson.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216458</id>
	<title>Why Not Send Xenu In To Kick Ass And Take Names?</title>
	<author>CyberSlammer</author>
	<datestamp>1259089740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too busy waging intergalactic war with South Park?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too busy waging intergalactic war with South Park ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too busy waging intergalactic war with South Park?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215662</id>
	<title>L. Con Hubbard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259086080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A direct quote from L Con Hubbard: <br>

<b>Attack...never defend.</b>

<br>

Apparently the only way to keep up a teetering "religion" is to attack.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A direct quote from L Con Hubbard : Attack...never defend .
Apparently the only way to keep up a teetering " religion " is to attack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A direct quote from L Con Hubbard: 

Attack...never defend.
Apparently the only way to keep up a teetering "religion" is to attack.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218188</id>
	<title>One more bytes it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259055060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ding dong,   the witch is dead!!!   Yay - one more spammer bytes the big weenie in the sky.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ding dong , the witch is dead ! ! !
Yay - one more spammer bytes the big weenie in the sky .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ding dong,   the witch is dead!!!
Yay - one more spammer bytes the big weenie in the sky.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216574</id>
	<title>Co$ are a bunch of whiny hypocrites!</title>
	<author>DaveV1.0</author>
	<datestamp>1259090460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They use those same tactics against what they consider to be their enemies, but when someone turns the tables on them, they shed a few crocodile tears and run to the police.</p><p>They have broken into the offices of the FBI and have members of their cult have died under suspicious circumstances while under their care, yet they have the gall to call what others do illegal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They use those same tactics against what they consider to be their enemies , but when someone turns the tables on them , they shed a few crocodile tears and run to the police.They have broken into the offices of the FBI and have members of their cult have died under suspicious circumstances while under their care , yet they have the gall to call what others do illegal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They use those same tactics against what they consider to be their enemies, but when someone turns the tables on them, they shed a few crocodile tears and run to the police.They have broken into the offices of the FBI and have members of their cult have died under suspicious circumstances while under their care, yet they have the gall to call what others do illegal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30223910</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>mahadiga</author>
	<datestamp>1257156420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>"Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool." -- Mark Twain</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool .
" -- Mark Twain</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool.
" -- Mark Twain</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216266</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259089080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types.</p></div> </blockquote><p>And you do not see a difference between them ?  Like one being pushed and the other pulled ?   Really ?</p><blockquote><div><p>You can't have it both ways.</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh yeah I can.  I can have it both ways by declaring it a one-way street (pun intended) by disagreeing with your notion of (spam) having a right to use <i>my</i> communication-pipe (snail-mail, phone, internet, my ears or otherwise) as you/they please, even against my expressed wishes.  I regard that as tresspassing.</p><blockquote><div><p> Freedom of speech, freedom of data transmission also applies to hawkers of Viiagr11a and c1la15!!) doesn't it?</p></div></blockquote><p>Sigh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...   Some people still think that "freedom of speech" is the same as having the right to demand other people to listen to them.  Grow up kid, you can't stay <i>that</i> ignorant all your life you know.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the " information wants to be free " types .
And you do not see a difference between them ?
Like one being pushed and the other pulled ?
Really ? You ca n't have it both ways.Oh yeah I can .
I can have it both ways by declaring it a one-way street ( pun intended ) by disagreeing with your notion of ( spam ) having a right to use my communication-pipe ( snail-mail , phone , internet , my ears or otherwise ) as you/they please , even against my expressed wishes .
I regard that as tresspassing .
Freedom of speech , freedom of data transmission also applies to hawkers of Viiagr11a and c1la15 ! !
) does n't it ? Sigh ... Some people still think that " freedom of speech " is the same as having the right to demand other people to listen to them .
Grow up kid , you ca n't stay that ignorant all your life you know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types.
And you do not see a difference between them ?
Like one being pushed and the other pulled ?
Really ?You can't have it both ways.Oh yeah I can.
I can have it both ways by declaring it a one-way street (pun intended) by disagreeing with your notion of (spam) having a right to use my communication-pipe (snail-mail, phone, internet, my ears or otherwise) as you/they please, even against my expressed wishes.
I regard that as tresspassing.
Freedom of speech, freedom of data transmission also applies to hawkers of Viiagr11a and c1la15!!
) doesn't it?Sigh ...   Some people still think that "freedom of speech" is the same as having the right to demand other people to listen to them.
Grow up kid, you can't stay that ignorant all your life you know.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215956</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259087460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Freedom of speech implies that the recipient wants to listen. I should be allowed to post the DeCSS code on the internet, but I should not be allowed to stuff dozens of copies in people's mailboxes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Freedom of speech implies that the recipient wants to listen .
I should be allowed to post the DeCSS code on the internet , but I should not be allowed to stuff dozens of copies in people 's mailboxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Freedom of speech implies that the recipient wants to listen.
I should be allowed to post the DeCSS code on the internet, but I should not be allowed to stuff dozens of copies in people's mailboxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216144</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1259088480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types.</p></div></blockquote><p>And if you get caught lying to the tax office about your income, you probably also pull the argument that free speech, as guaranteed by the constitution, also covers lying to the tax office, right?</p><p>Freedom of speech doesn't mean that you may (mis-)use any medium to tell your opinion. It just says that you must have the possibility to do so, and to do so in public. It doesn't say you have the right to fill up private mailboxes with it. I reserve the right to decide what I want to have in my(!) mailbox. If you want to tell the world about how great your replica watches are, or how much you like the Democrats or Republicans, you are invited to do on any public channel. But <em>keep it out of my mailbox.</em> It's <em>my</em> mailbox. It is <em>not</em> public.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the " information wants to be free " types.And if you get caught lying to the tax office about your income , you probably also pull the argument that free speech , as guaranteed by the constitution , also covers lying to the tax office , right ? Freedom of speech does n't mean that you may ( mis- ) use any medium to tell your opinion .
It just says that you must have the possibility to do so , and to do so in public .
It does n't say you have the right to fill up private mailboxes with it .
I reserve the right to decide what I want to have in my ( !
) mailbox .
If you want to tell the world about how great your replica watches are , or how much you like the Democrats or Republicans , you are invited to do on any public channel .
But keep it out of my mailbox .
It 's my mailbox .
It is not public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny to me that the people who complain about spam the most are also the "information wants to be free" types.And if you get caught lying to the tax office about your income, you probably also pull the argument that free speech, as guaranteed by the constitution, also covers lying to the tax office, right?Freedom of speech doesn't mean that you may (mis-)use any medium to tell your opinion.
It just says that you must have the possibility to do so, and to do so in public.
It doesn't say you have the right to fill up private mailboxes with it.
I reserve the right to decide what I want to have in my(!
) mailbox.
If you want to tell the world about how great your replica watches are, or how much you like the Democrats or Republicans, you are invited to do on any public channel.
But keep it out of my mailbox.
It's my mailbox.
It is not public.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216120</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259088300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh I don't know, most of the things that Anonymous (and others) have been protesting about them is just as true of the Catholic church; they are both international criminal organizations. The difference is that Scientology has actually been caught and convicted at least once.</p><p>Religion: large cult<br>
Cult: small religion</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh I do n't know , most of the things that Anonymous ( and others ) have been protesting about them is just as true of the Catholic church ; they are both international criminal organizations .
The difference is that Scientology has actually been caught and convicted at least once.Religion : large cult Cult : small religion</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh I don't know, most of the things that Anonymous (and others) have been protesting about them is just as true of the Catholic church; they are both international criminal organizations.
The difference is that Scientology has actually been caught and convicted at least once.Religion: large cult
Cult: small religion</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216658</id>
	<title>Not defined in the article...</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1259090880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Was Ralsky actually arrested and tried in person, or is he still running around free?  The closest answer to that which I can find is at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan\_Ralsky" title="wikipedia.org">his wikipedia entry</a> [wikipedia.org] where it states that <p><div class="quote"><p>On June 22, 2009, he pleaded guilty to wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering charges and violating the CAN-SPAM Act.[10] He agreed to assist in the prosecution of other spammers in exchange for sentencing consideration</p></div><p>
By comparison, trials for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo\_Kuvayev" title="wikipedia.org">other spammers</a> [wikipedia.org] have <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4539715.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">been held without them present</a> [bbc.co.uk] as they tend to not stay in one place long.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was Ralsky actually arrested and tried in person , or is he still running around free ?
The closest answer to that which I can find is at his wikipedia entry [ wikipedia.org ] where it states that On June 22 , 2009 , he pleaded guilty to wire fraud , mail fraud , money laundering charges and violating the CAN-SPAM Act .
[ 10 ] He agreed to assist in the prosecution of other spammers in exchange for sentencing consideration By comparison , trials for other spammers [ wikipedia.org ] have been held without them present [ bbc.co.uk ] as they tend to not stay in one place long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was Ralsky actually arrested and tried in person, or is he still running around free?
The closest answer to that which I can find is at his wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org] where it states that On June 22, 2009, he pleaded guilty to wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering charges and violating the CAN-SPAM Act.
[10] He agreed to assist in the prosecution of other spammers in exchange for sentencing consideration
By comparison, trials for other spammers [wikipedia.org] have been held without them present [bbc.co.uk] as they tend to not stay in one place long.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215670</id>
	<title>Look no further for a viral media consultant</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259086080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He got the website 141 million hits? Sounds like they should be paying him, not prosecuting him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He got the website 141 million hits ?
Sounds like they should be paying him , not prosecuting him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He got the website 141 million hits?
Sounds like they should be paying him, not prosecuting him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30240182</id>
	<title>Re:Scientology is not a religion!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259234880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no such thing as a &ldquo;religion&rdquo; or &ldquo;church&rdquo;. There is only unlucky people with a type of schizophrenia, and a business that uses it to exploit them.</p><p>Religion does not need churches.<br>God does not need a religion around him.<br>The universe does not need a god for its explanation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no such thing as a    religion    or    church    .
There is only unlucky people with a type of schizophrenia , and a business that uses it to exploit them.Religion does not need churches.God does not need a religion around him.The universe does not need a god for its explanation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no such thing as a “religion” or “church”.
There is only unlucky people with a type of schizophrenia, and a business that uses it to exploit them.Religion does not need churches.God does not need a religion around him.The universe does not need a god for its explanation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216092</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259088180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, have you not heard about all the atrocities they've committed?  Do 5 minutes of research and try and tell yourself they are anything but a criminal organization.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , have you not heard about all the atrocities they 've committed ?
Do 5 minutes of research and try and tell yourself they are anything but a criminal organization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, have you not heard about all the atrocities they've committed?
Do 5 minutes of research and try and tell yourself they are anything but a criminal organization.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216022</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1259087880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you sure it is the same people, or are you just making that assertion because it helps you make a point?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you sure it is the same people , or are you just making that assertion because it helps you make a point ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you sure it is the same people, or are you just making that assertion because it helps you make a point?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30240196</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259235000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see none. There is no difference between &ldquo;cult&rdquo; and &ldquo;religion&rdquo;. It&rsquo;s always a mild schizophrenia. And a church is not a religion. It&rsquo;s a business to exploit people who are sick with that disease.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see none .
There is no difference between    cult    and    religion    .
It    s always a mild schizophrenia .
And a church is not a religion .
It    s a business to exploit people who are sick with that disease .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see none.
There is no difference between “cult” and “religion”.
It’s always a mild schizophrenia.
And a church is not a religion.
It’s a business to exploit people who are sick with that disease.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218018</id>
	<title>Five years for SPAM</title>
	<author>freedomseven</author>
	<datestamp>1259054160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He got off light. Hanging is to goo for him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He got off light .
Hanging is to goo for him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He got off light.
Hanging is to goo for him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218140</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259054820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not saying that bomb threads are funny. But its hard to know who's more nuts, the "scientologists" or a<br>19 yr old so pissed off at them to do all that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not saying that bomb threads are funny .
But its hard to know who 's more nuts , the " scientologists " or a19 yr old so pissed off at them to do all that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not saying that bomb threads are funny.
But its hard to know who's more nuts, the "scientologists" or a19 yr old so pissed off at them to do all that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30224874</id>
	<title>Please explain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257168960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is up with this "one year and one day in jail ", why did they not just make it a year?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is up with this " one year and one day in jail " , why did they not just make it a year ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is up with this "one year and one day in jail ", why did they not just make it a year?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30228788</id>
	<title>Re:Catholicism a Cult?</title>
	<author>Digz</author>
	<datestamp>1257190860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;</b><br>Early Christian followers were threatened, beaten, etc.</p></div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>..and this was driven by the leaders of the Church how? That is the point - in a cult those in charge put you into these situations in order to brainwash you. The persecution of the Church by the Empire is not even cut from the same cloth.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;</b><br>Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.</p></div><p>Gee, I'm glad that you were able to sum up all of the Catechism and Scripture into that one line of the Beatitudes. You know, maybe Thomas Aquinas would have written a lot less had he realized that the entirety of Christian thought could be summed up in this one line. Or perhaps you are trying to shoehorn something here.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;</b><br>Jesus is  said to have unconditional love for all people.</p></div><p>Seriously? You are honestly comparing the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love\_bombing" title="wikipedia.org">love bombing</a> [wikipedia.org] that goes on in cults to the Atonement?</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>They get a new identity based on the group;</b><br>Followers of Jesus are no longer Jews, Pagans, etc... They are known as Christians.</p></div><p>So then I guess all countries are cults as well, considering that a Frenchman who gained citizenship in Canada would become a Canadian. The horrors!</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled. </b><br>The 4 gospels were all pretty much copied from the same source (and long after Jesus died).  Each one has a different audience, but the content is largely the same. In this sense, followers have restricted access to information.  The Catholic church also regulates which scriptures form the Bible (and which do not).   Not all writings of the Dead Sea scrolls made it into the Bible.  Throughout time, religion have been used as a means to divide people.  In the past, those who have questioned the religious leadership have been excommunicated, or worse...</p></div><p> Hmm, that's strange. When I went through RCIA no one ever isolated me from my friends, family, and work. (unless, of course, you're referring to the hour a week we went to classes). No one bothered to come to my house and remove all the comparative religious texts I have as well. No one tried to <a href="http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/CoS/censored.html" title="shipbrook.com">circumvent my web browsing by sending me a program that would block sites critical of the Catholic Church</a> [shipbrook.com]. No one cajoled me into installing software that would <a href="http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/CoS/scienositter2000.html" title="xs4all.nl"> block any emails critical of my faith</a> [xs4all.nl].The program I went through must have been defective. Of course, you could be just shoehorning again.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Even today, try being a Catholic and marrying a non-Catholic in a Church.  It is not allowed!</p>  </div><p>So after all this study you never heard of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensation\_(Catholic\_Church)" title="wikipedia.org">dispensation</a> [wikipedia.org]?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The meaning of "Catholic" (as welcoming) only applies to their Cathechism school!</p></div><p>No, Katholikos (which is a Greek word, pardon the Latinization) means <a href="http://www.ancient-future.net/catholicchurch.html" title="ancient-future.net">"universal"</a> [ancient-future.net]. As to your argument, it defies logic - especially when the proper definition is known.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>From everything I've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology, they do all of those things.</b><br>From everything I have read and know about Catholicism, they do and/or have done all those things.</p></div><p>quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations ; Early Christian followers were threatened , beaten , etc .
..and this was driven by the leaders of the Church how ?
That is the point - in a cult those in charge put you into these situations in order to brainwash you .
The persecution of the Church by the Empire is not even cut from the same cloth .
Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation , which is repeatedly emphasized ; Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice ' sake , for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.Gee , I 'm glad that you were able to sum up all of the Catechism and Scripture into that one line of the Beatitudes .
You know , maybe Thomas Aquinas would have written a lot less had he realized that the entirety of Christian thought could be summed up in this one line .
Or perhaps you are trying to shoehorn something here .
They receive unconditional love , acceptance , and attention from a charismatic leader ; Jesus is said to have unconditional love for all people.Seriously ?
You are honestly comparing the love bombing [ wikipedia.org ] that goes on in cults to the Atonement ?
They get a new identity based on the group ; Followers of Jesus are no longer Jews , Pagans , etc... They are known as Christians.So then I guess all countries are cults as well , considering that a Frenchman who gained citizenship in Canada would become a Canadian .
The horrors !
They are subject to entrapment ( isolation from friends , relatives , and the mainstream culture ) and their access to information is severely controlled .
The 4 gospels were all pretty much copied from the same source ( and long after Jesus died ) .
Each one has a different audience , but the content is largely the same .
In this sense , followers have restricted access to information .
The Catholic church also regulates which scriptures form the Bible ( and which do not ) .
Not all writings of the Dead Sea scrolls made it into the Bible .
Throughout time , religion have been used as a means to divide people .
In the past , those who have questioned the religious leadership have been excommunicated , or worse... Hmm , that 's strange .
When I went through RCIA no one ever isolated me from my friends , family , and work .
( unless , of course , you 're referring to the hour a week we went to classes ) .
No one bothered to come to my house and remove all the comparative religious texts I have as well .
No one tried to circumvent my web browsing by sending me a program that would block sites critical of the Catholic Church [ shipbrook.com ] .
No one cajoled me into installing software that would block any emails critical of my faith [ xs4all.nl ] .The program I went through must have been defective .
Of course , you could be just shoehorning again.Even today , try being a Catholic and marrying a non-Catholic in a Church .
It is not allowed !
So after all this study you never heard of a dispensation [ wikipedia.org ] ? The meaning of " Catholic " ( as welcoming ) only applies to their Cathechism school ! No , Katholikos ( which is a Greek word , pardon the Latinization ) means " universal " [ ancient-future.net ] .
As to your argument , it defies logic - especially when the proper definition is known .
From everything I 've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology , they do all of those things.From everything I have read and know about Catholicism , they do and/or have done all those things.quod gratis asseritur , gratis negatur</tokentext>
<sentencetext> People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;Early Christian followers were threatened, beaten, etc.
..and this was driven by the leaders of the Church how?
That is the point - in a cult those in charge put you into these situations in order to brainwash you.
The persecution of the Church by the Empire is not even cut from the same cloth.
Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.Gee, I'm glad that you were able to sum up all of the Catechism and Scripture into that one line of the Beatitudes.
You know, maybe Thomas Aquinas would have written a lot less had he realized that the entirety of Christian thought could be summed up in this one line.
Or perhaps you are trying to shoehorn something here.
They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;Jesus is  said to have unconditional love for all people.Seriously?
You are honestly comparing the love bombing [wikipedia.org] that goes on in cults to the Atonement?
They get a new identity based on the group;Followers of Jesus are no longer Jews, Pagans, etc... They are known as Christians.So then I guess all countries are cults as well, considering that a Frenchman who gained citizenship in Canada would become a Canadian.
The horrors!
They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.
The 4 gospels were all pretty much copied from the same source (and long after Jesus died).
Each one has a different audience, but the content is largely the same.
In this sense, followers have restricted access to information.
The Catholic church also regulates which scriptures form the Bible (and which do not).
Not all writings of the Dead Sea scrolls made it into the Bible.
Throughout time, religion have been used as a means to divide people.
In the past, those who have questioned the religious leadership have been excommunicated, or worse... Hmm, that's strange.
When I went through RCIA no one ever isolated me from my friends, family, and work.
(unless, of course, you're referring to the hour a week we went to classes).
No one bothered to come to my house and remove all the comparative religious texts I have as well.
No one tried to circumvent my web browsing by sending me a program that would block sites critical of the Catholic Church [shipbrook.com].
No one cajoled me into installing software that would  block any emails critical of my faith [xs4all.nl].The program I went through must have been defective.
Of course, you could be just shoehorning again.Even today, try being a Catholic and marrying a non-Catholic in a Church.
It is not allowed!
So after all this study you never heard of a dispensation [wikipedia.org]?The meaning of "Catholic" (as welcoming) only applies to their Cathechism school!No, Katholikos (which is a Greek word, pardon the Latinization) means "universal" [ancient-future.net].
As to your argument, it defies logic - especially when the proper definition is known.
From everything I've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology, they do all of those things.From everything I have read and know about Catholicism, they do and/or have done all those things.quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216316</id>
	<title>Ok...</title>
	<author>koinu</author>
	<datestamp>1259089200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church^Wsect leaders</p></div><p>Where do I send fan mail for this guy?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>8,139 threatening phone calls , 3.6 million e-mails , 141 million hits on its website , ten acts of vandalism against its property , 22 bomb threats , and eight death threats against Church ^ Wsect leadersWhere do I send fan mail for this guy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church^Wsect leadersWhere do I send fan mail for this guy?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706</id>
	<title>Scientology is not a religion!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259086260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...it's a tax evasion scheme.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...it 's a tax evasion scheme .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it's a tax evasion scheme.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30240090</id>
	<title>Not enough, just not enough.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259233980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.'</p></div><p>And still it&rsquo;s not enough. There is no punishment that equals mass-psycho-manipulating people into religious schizophrenia, to use them as bondservants for the own greed for power and money. It&rsquo;s on one level with mass-murder.<br>But since it&rsquo;s invisible it&rdquo;s treated as being &ldquo;not real&rdquo;. I tell you, it&rsquo;s a full-scale weapon of mass-destruction. Just a psychological one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls , 3.6 million e-mails , 141 million hits on its website , ten acts of vandalism against its property , 22 bomb threats , and eight death threats against Church leaders .
'And still it    s not enough .
There is no punishment that equals mass-psycho-manipulating people into religious schizophrenia , to use them as bondservants for the own greed for power and money .
It    s on one level with mass-murder.But since it    s invisible it    s treated as being    not real    .
I tell you , it    s a full-scale weapon of mass-destruction .
Just a psychological one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.
'And still it’s not enough.
There is no punishment that equals mass-psycho-manipulating people into religious schizophrenia, to use them as bondservants for the own greed for power and money.
It’s on one level with mass-murder.But since it’s invisible it”s treated as being “not real”.
I tell you, it’s a full-scale weapon of mass-destruction.
Just a psychological one.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220766</id>
	<title>Today's batting average</title>
	<author>earlymon</author>
	<datestamp>1259066940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One hit, one miss, so that's a batting average of 500 for the courts.</p><p>I'd give them a 750 if they let the 1.1 guy off for time served by virtue of effort - at 19, he is - by definition - thinking of the children.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One hit , one miss , so that 's a batting average of 500 for the courts.I 'd give them a 750 if they let the 1.1 guy off for time served by virtue of effort - at 19 , he is - by definition - thinking of the children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One hit, one miss, so that's a batting average of 500 for the courts.I'd give them a 750 if they let the 1.1 guy off for time served by virtue of effort - at 19, he is - by definition - thinking of the children.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216220</id>
	<title>Re:dark side of the coin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259088840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Though you might agree with this particular case, it opens up the door for more intrusive precedents.</p></div><p>This is insane; like arguing that prosecuting graffiti as vandalism will suddenly descend into house painters doing hard time.  Exactly the same kind of "I'm too stupid to distinguish good from bad" as school officials occasionally get laughed at when some draconian rule (say, meant to address gang activity) is applied mercilessly to an obviously good student.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>As to DDoS attacks, how many times are you allowed to knock on a church's door before it becomes illegal?</p></div><p>You've been struck dumb by your paranoia.  There's a qualitative difference between a knocking on a church's door (accessing a website) and trying to knock down a church's door (DDoS'ing it).  No legitimate user, even those employing web crawlers, will generate within orders of magnitude of the traffic as a DDoS attack.  Even if a non-malicious user somehow "accidentally" DDoS' a site, that person would still be liable for that negligent behavior.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though you might agree with this particular case , it opens up the door for more intrusive precedents.This is insane ; like arguing that prosecuting graffiti as vandalism will suddenly descend into house painters doing hard time .
Exactly the same kind of " I 'm too stupid to distinguish good from bad " as school officials occasionally get laughed at when some draconian rule ( say , meant to address gang activity ) is applied mercilessly to an obviously good student.As to DDoS attacks , how many times are you allowed to knock on a church 's door before it becomes illegal ? You 've been struck dumb by your paranoia .
There 's a qualitative difference between a knocking on a church 's door ( accessing a website ) and trying to knock down a church 's door ( DDoS'ing it ) .
No legitimate user , even those employing web crawlers , will generate within orders of magnitude of the traffic as a DDoS attack .
Even if a non-malicious user somehow " accidentally " DDoS ' a site , that person would still be liable for that negligent behavior .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though you might agree with this particular case, it opens up the door for more intrusive precedents.This is insane; like arguing that prosecuting graffiti as vandalism will suddenly descend into house painters doing hard time.
Exactly the same kind of "I'm too stupid to distinguish good from bad" as school officials occasionally get laughed at when some draconian rule (say, meant to address gang activity) is applied mercilessly to an obviously good student.As to DDoS attacks, how many times are you allowed to knock on a church's door before it becomes illegal?You've been struck dumb by your paranoia.
There's a qualitative difference between a knocking on a church's door (accessing a website) and trying to knock down a church's door (DDoS'ing it).
No legitimate user, even those employing web crawlers, will generate within orders of magnitude of the traffic as a DDoS attack.
Even if a non-malicious user somehow "accidentally" DDoS' a site, that person would still be liable for that negligent behavior.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Wyatt Earp</author>
	<datestamp>1259088120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are a cult.</p><p>People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;<br>Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;<br>They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;<br>They get a new identity based on the group;<br>They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.</p><p>From everything I've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology, they do all of those things.</p><p>Contrast that to say...Judaism or Islam, theres a big difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are a cult.People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations ; Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation , which is repeatedly emphasized ; They receive unconditional love , acceptance , and attention from a charismatic leader ; They get a new identity based on the group ; They are subject to entrapment ( isolation from friends , relatives , and the mainstream culture ) and their access to information is severely controlled.From everything I 've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology , they do all of those things.Contrast that to say...Judaism or Islam , theres a big difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are a cult.People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;They get a new identity based on the group;They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.From everything I've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology, they do all of those things.Contrast that to say...Judaism or Islam, theres a big difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216800</id>
	<title>Re:scientology</title>
	<author>Chameleon Man</author>
	<datestamp>1259091540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can tell you (personally) that the Christian gathering I go to has zero intention of either. Our group gathers in the basement of someones home and we all pitch in if we want to put on an event, but no one is ever pressured to give money. Our group, and I'm sure most other Christians, believe in the inevitability of an armageddon, therefore prompting us to seperate ourselves from society rather than controlling it. If we try to control it, then we WILL become the problem (See just about any religion that has come into power). I believe Buddhism follows the same format.

That said, not all churches "strive" for power and control. This is one of the key factors that makes Scientology a frighteningly real problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can tell you ( personally ) that the Christian gathering I go to has zero intention of either .
Our group gathers in the basement of someones home and we all pitch in if we want to put on an event , but no one is ever pressured to give money .
Our group , and I 'm sure most other Christians , believe in the inevitability of an armageddon , therefore prompting us to seperate ourselves from society rather than controlling it .
If we try to control it , then we WILL become the problem ( See just about any religion that has come into power ) .
I believe Buddhism follows the same format .
That said , not all churches " strive " for power and control .
This is one of the key factors that makes Scientology a frighteningly real problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can tell you (personally) that the Christian gathering I go to has zero intention of either.
Our group gathers in the basement of someones home and we all pitch in if we want to put on an event, but no one is ever pressured to give money.
Our group, and I'm sure most other Christians, believe in the inevitability of an armageddon, therefore prompting us to seperate ourselves from society rather than controlling it.
If we try to control it, then we WILL become the problem (See just about any religion that has come into power).
I believe Buddhism follows the same format.
That said, not all churches "strive" for power and control.
This is one of the key factors that makes Scientology a frighteningly real problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216660</id>
	<title>Re:Ralsky's the guy that Slashdot spammed...</title>
	<author>AVryhof</author>
	<datestamp>1259090880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that link work safe?</p><p>Did someone upload the Goatse guy to Slashdot's servers?</p><p>God Save us all!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that link work safe ? Did someone upload the Goatse guy to Slashdot 's servers ? God Save us all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that link work safe?Did someone upload the Goatse guy to Slashdot's servers?God Save us all!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215654</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30240196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30222402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30221430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30232734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30221340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30240182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30223004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30228788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30223910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30232870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30225968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_24_1632228_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30221340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30240182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217092
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217160
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216144
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220178
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30232734
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30223004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215828
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30232870
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30222402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215804
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215840
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30215864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30217150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30223910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216016
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216066
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30240196
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30220854
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30225968
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219706
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218128
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30221430
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30219252
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30228788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216800
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30218010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_24_1632228.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_24_1632228.30216944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
