<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_01_0319211</id>
	<title>Apple Censors Dalai Lama iPhone Apps In China</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262371920000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>eldavojohn writes <i>"Google and Yahoo! have relinquished any sort of ethical integrity with regards to free speech in China but Apple appears to be following suit by <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/185604/apple\_censors\_dalai\_lama\_iphone\_apps\_in\_china.html">blocking Dalai Lama applications in the Chinese iPhone app store</a>.  An official Apple statement reads, 'We continue to comply with local laws.  Not all apps are available in every country.'  A small monetary price to pay for the economic boon that is the blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principles."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " Google and Yahoo !
have relinquished any sort of ethical integrity with regards to free speech in China but Apple appears to be following suit by blocking Dalai Lama applications in the Chinese iPhone app store .
An official Apple statement reads , 'We continue to comply with local laws .
Not all apps are available in every country .
' A small monetary price to pay for the economic boon that is the blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principles .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "Google and Yahoo!
have relinquished any sort of ethical integrity with regards to free speech in China but Apple appears to be following suit by blocking Dalai Lama applications in the Chinese iPhone app store.
An official Apple statement reads, 'We continue to comply with local laws.
Not all apps are available in every country.
'  A small monetary price to pay for the economic boon that is the blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principles.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30619710</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom!</title>
	<author>kurt555gs</author>
	<datestamp>1262370060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"No one will develop", crappy apps, I have a link for you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p><a href="http://bit.ly/7eQb6f/" title="bit.ly">http://bit.ly/7eQb6f/</a> [bit.ly]</p><p>Lets see, the best mobile browser on the planet, Fennec, is first introduced on exactly what platform? iPhone? Nope. Android? Not. WinCE? Don't think so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" No one will develop " , crappy apps , I have a link for you ....http : //bit.ly/7eQb6f/ [ bit.ly ] Lets see , the best mobile browser on the planet , Fennec , is first introduced on exactly what platform ?
iPhone ? Nope .
Android ? Not .
WinCE ? Do n't think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"No one will develop", crappy apps, I have a link for you ....http://bit.ly/7eQb6f/ [bit.ly]Lets see, the best mobile browser on the planet, Fennec, is first introduced on exactly what platform?
iPhone? Nope.
Android? Not.
WinCE? Don't think so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613792</id>
	<title>Re:Cross another one off the list</title>
	<author>Supa Jorell</author>
	<datestamp>1262357400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What does buying AAPL stock have to do with this?  When you buy a share of a company, those funds are never seen by said company.  They go directly to the holder of the stock...and you should've bought Apple stock last year - last year at this time, the stock was at $85/share and on Thursday it closed at $210....would have been a great return on your investment......</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does buying AAPL stock have to do with this ?
When you buy a share of a company , those funds are never seen by said company .
They go directly to the holder of the stock...and you should 've bought Apple stock last year - last year at this time , the stock was at $ 85/share and on Thursday it closed at $ 210....would have been a great return on your investment..... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does buying AAPL stock have to do with this?
When you buy a share of a company, those funds are never seen by said company.
They go directly to the holder of the stock...and you should've bought Apple stock last year - last year at this time, the stock was at $85/share and on Thursday it closed at $210....would have been a great return on your investment......</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613142</id>
	<title>Principals?  Nice editing, slashdot.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262343660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My god, now I remember why I stopped reading this site years ago.  I lasted a mere two weeks before I realized nothing has changed.</p><p>Will<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. *ever* hire competent editors, or at least screen submissions for egregious grammatical, usage, or diction errors?</p><p>This site is run by banana-compensated monkeys, and the bananas are rotten.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My god , now I remember why I stopped reading this site years ago .
I lasted a mere two weeks before I realized nothing has changed.Will / .
* ever * hire competent editors , or at least screen submissions for egregious grammatical , usage , or diction errors ? This site is run by banana-compensated monkeys , and the bananas are rotten .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My god, now I remember why I stopped reading this site years ago.
I lasted a mere two weeks before I realized nothing has changed.Will /.
*ever* hire competent editors, or at least screen submissions for egregious grammatical, usage, or diction errors?This site is run by banana-compensated monkeys, and the bananas are rotten.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612798</id>
	<title>Read as...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not profitable anyway as no one will buy this app.<br>Buying this app is like bying a ticket to jail...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not profitable anyway as no one will buy this app.Buying this app is like bying a ticket to jail.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not profitable anyway as no one will buy this app.Buying this app is like bying a ticket to jail...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612924</id>
	<title>Re:Principals?</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1262339100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They figured... they'd sacrificed their principles... why not sacrifice some principals as well.</p><p>Once you let go on a little evil, why not go ahead for the big evil and save time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They figured... they 'd sacrificed their principles... why not sacrifice some principals as well.Once you let go on a little evil , why not go ahead for the big evil and save time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They figured... they'd sacrificed their principles... why not sacrifice some principals as well.Once you let go on a little evil, why not go ahead for the big evil and save time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612882</id>
	<title>What else China censors ?</title>
	<author>abbe</author>
	<datestamp>1262338380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can we have a Slashdot story for each of such things which China's sensors censor, on apple.slashdot.org ? Chinese censorship is too common for YRO...:-)</p><p>New Year Greetings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we have a Slashdot story for each of such things which China 's sensors censor , on apple.slashdot.org ?
Chinese censorship is too common for YRO... : - ) New Year Greetings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we have a Slashdot story for each of such things which China's sensors censor, on apple.slashdot.org ?
Chinese censorship is too common for YRO...:-)New Year Greetings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613812</id>
	<title>Re:Cross another one off the list</title>
	<author>Thoreauly Nuts</author>
	<datestamp>1262357640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China?</p></div><p>This comment isn't necessarily directed at you, but I always love people who use extremist arguments so they don't have to do anything at all. The world isn't black and white and you don't have to boycott all of China overnight to make a difference.</p><p>You can start by simply using sites like this to guide your purchases: <a href="http://www.stillmadeinusa.com/" title="stillmadeinusa.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.stillmadeinusa.com/</a> [stillmadeinusa.com]</p><p>Not only will you lessen support for China, but you are increasing it for your fellow Americans (assuming you are one).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China ? This comment is n't necessarily directed at you , but I always love people who use extremist arguments so they do n't have to do anything at all .
The world is n't black and white and you do n't have to boycott all of China overnight to make a difference.You can start by simply using sites like this to guide your purchases : http : //www.stillmadeinusa.com/ [ stillmadeinusa.com ] Not only will you lessen support for China , but you are increasing it for your fellow Americans ( assuming you are one ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China?This comment isn't necessarily directed at you, but I always love people who use extremist arguments so they don't have to do anything at all.
The world isn't black and white and you don't have to boycott all of China overnight to make a difference.You can start by simply using sites like this to guide your purchases: http://www.stillmadeinusa.com/ [stillmadeinusa.com]Not only will you lessen support for China, but you are increasing it for your fellow Americans (assuming you are one).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613034</id>
	<title>Re:Think Different?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262341200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First they thought Dalai Lama is a cool poster boy and later they did some rethinking.</p><p>Chinese suppression of Dalai Lama seems to increase his popularity. In Tibet, his status among locals (non Chinese) is close to our rock stars. Almost every Tibetan who I met in Lhasa showed me a photo of him (secretively) and to my knowledge it is even illegal to have his photo over there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First they thought Dalai Lama is a cool poster boy and later they did some rethinking.Chinese suppression of Dalai Lama seems to increase his popularity .
In Tibet , his status among locals ( non Chinese ) is close to our rock stars .
Almost every Tibetan who I met in Lhasa showed me a photo of him ( secretively ) and to my knowledge it is even illegal to have his photo over there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First they thought Dalai Lama is a cool poster boy and later they did some rethinking.Chinese suppression of Dalai Lama seems to increase his popularity.
In Tibet, his status among locals (non Chinese) is close to our rock stars.
Almost every Tibetan who I met in Lhasa showed me a photo of him (secretively) and to my knowledge it is even illegal to have his photo over there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612780</id>
	<title>Apple sucks that Chinese tit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1293825360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good to know that Apple supports repressive regimes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good to know that Apple supports repressive regimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good to know that Apple supports repressive regimes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092</id>
	<title>Cross another one off the list</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262342820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>I've never given Google or Yahoo a free pass on this issue, and I don't plan on buying AAPL stock any more, either.<br><br>I'm not willing to make money from asshole behavior, at least knowingly.<br><br>I believe it is against the *long term* interests of these companies to knuckle under to this sort of thing.&nbsp; Simply don't operate in China.&nbsp; Or do Sergei and Steve not have enough billions?&nbsp; Bah.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never given Google or Yahoo a free pass on this issue , and I do n't plan on buying AAPL stock any more , either.I 'm not willing to make money from asshole behavior , at least knowingly.I believe it is against the * long term * interests of these companies to knuckle under to this sort of thing.   Simply do n't operate in China.   Or do Sergei and Steve not have enough billions ?   Bah .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never given Google or Yahoo a free pass on this issue, and I don't plan on buying AAPL stock any more, either.I'm not willing to make money from asshole behavior, at least knowingly.I believe it is against the *long term* interests of these companies to knuckle under to this sort of thing.  Simply don't operate in China.  Or do Sergei and Steve not have enough billions?  Bah.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613360</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262347800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple... it really whips the (Dalai) Lamma's ass!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple... it really whips the ( Dalai ) Lamma 's ass !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple... it really whips the (Dalai) Lamma's ass!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615660</id>
	<title>Re:Think Different?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262378640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>well said, and spoken like a true apple weasel.</p><p>can you not see that apple are colluding in this denial of peoples human rights and the reason for this is financial?</p><p>is there a more disgusting type of person in existence than the average apple customer?</p><p>if only they knew that the only sense in which they're expressing their personality with their little purchases is to send out a clear message to the effect of "i don't know much about technology" &amp; "i don't have much of a personality really".</p><p>i hope you work your fingers to the bone in order to raise the cash to buy your next apple toy. die you hypocritical little vermin, die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well said , and spoken like a true apple weasel.can you not see that apple are colluding in this denial of peoples human rights and the reason for this is financial ? is there a more disgusting type of person in existence than the average apple customer ? if only they knew that the only sense in which they 're expressing their personality with their little purchases is to send out a clear message to the effect of " i do n't know much about technology " &amp; " i do n't have much of a personality really " .i hope you work your fingers to the bone in order to raise the cash to buy your next apple toy .
die you hypocritical little vermin , die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well said, and spoken like a true apple weasel.can you not see that apple are colluding in this denial of peoples human rights and the reason for this is financial?is there a more disgusting type of person in existence than the average apple customer?if only they knew that the only sense in which they're expressing their personality with their little purchases is to send out a clear message to the effect of "i don't know much about technology" &amp; "i don't have much of a personality really".i hope you work your fingers to the bone in order to raise the cash to buy your next apple toy.
die you hypocritical little vermin, die.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615016</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262371920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So as in... 'NO ONE' will develop for the Nokia N900, watch as that platform gets a lot of crappy apps and unpolished crap. Good luck to it, but the future prospect do not look promising for that platform and I think a lot of people will be dissapointed a year from now looking back at the lack of progress/developers.<br>Knowing the type of people who will want it they are not the most willing to spend money, funny we never get followup articles to all these open source projects that take off or a government who wants to switch. A little article digging will usually show that some of the articles around here that drew a lot of attention, came out to be nothing or they abandon the project.</p><p>Sorry to burst your bubble, but the phone needs backing by a bigger organization to get a proper environment setup on the phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So as in... 'NO ONE ' will develop for the Nokia N900 , watch as that platform gets a lot of crappy apps and unpolished crap .
Good luck to it , but the future prospect do not look promising for that platform and I think a lot of people will be dissapointed a year from now looking back at the lack of progress/developers.Knowing the type of people who will want it they are not the most willing to spend money , funny we never get followup articles to all these open source projects that take off or a government who wants to switch .
A little article digging will usually show that some of the articles around here that drew a lot of attention , came out to be nothing or they abandon the project.Sorry to burst your bubble , but the phone needs backing by a bigger organization to get a proper environment setup on the phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So as in... 'NO ONE' will develop for the Nokia N900, watch as that platform gets a lot of crappy apps and unpolished crap.
Good luck to it, but the future prospect do not look promising for that platform and I think a lot of people will be dissapointed a year from now looking back at the lack of progress/developers.Knowing the type of people who will want it they are not the most willing to spend money, funny we never get followup articles to all these open source projects that take off or a government who wants to switch.
A little article digging will usually show that some of the articles around here that drew a lot of attention, came out to be nothing or they abandon the project.Sorry to burst your bubble, but the phone needs backing by a bigger organization to get a proper environment setup on the phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796</id>
	<title>Principals?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principals.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Maybe they should pay in superintendents then, or did you mean principles?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principals .
Maybe they should pay in superintendents then , or did you mean principles ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principals.
Maybe they should pay in superintendents then, or did you mean principles?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612922</id>
	<title>Re:Principals?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262339040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, no, Apple is clearly paying down their debt to China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , no , Apple is clearly paying down their debt to China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, no, Apple is clearly paying down their debt to China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612890</id>
	<title>Not just China..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262338500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guess what, Apple doesn't allow Canadians to purchase certain apps, movies and albums either.</p><p>It's called different laws for different markets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess what , Apple does n't allow Canadians to purchase certain apps , movies and albums either.It 's called different laws for different markets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess what, Apple doesn't allow Canadians to purchase certain apps, movies and albums either.It's called different laws for different markets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614324</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>shar303</author>
	<datestamp>1262364600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously you're not aware that the British brutally controlled the whole of india for a long long time, and with less than 20,000 soldiers. that's a country of close to a billion people controlled by 20,000.</p><p>one question for you, do you think that by apple making money from helping to take away the human rights of people then they are strengthening "our own freedoms" as you put it, and thus, down the line giving us more of chance of helping them should they decide they do want to be free? how far would you go with this? just how flexible is your moral compass?</p><p>also, your point of view is pretty convenient for big business isn't it - would it surprise you to know that your belief is an echo of one put forward by Rupert Murdoch a few years back...? someone who clearly believes that the needs of big business are more far important than freedom or democracy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously you 're not aware that the British brutally controlled the whole of india for a long long time , and with less than 20,000 soldiers .
that 's a country of close to a billion people controlled by 20,000.one question for you , do you think that by apple making money from helping to take away the human rights of people then they are strengthening " our own freedoms " as you put it , and thus , down the line giving us more of chance of helping them should they decide they do want to be free ?
how far would you go with this ?
just how flexible is your moral compass ? also , your point of view is pretty convenient for big business is n't it - would it surprise you to know that your belief is an echo of one put forward by Rupert Murdoch a few years back... ?
someone who clearly believes that the needs of big business are more far important than freedom or democracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously you're not aware that the British brutally controlled the whole of india for a long long time, and with less than 20,000 soldiers.
that's a country of close to a billion people controlled by 20,000.one question for you, do you think that by apple making money from helping to take away the human rights of people then they are strengthening "our own freedoms" as you put it, and thus, down the line giving us more of chance of helping them should they decide they do want to be free?
how far would you go with this?
just how flexible is your moral compass?also, your point of view is pretty convenient for big business isn't it - would it surprise you to know that your belief is an echo of one put forward by Rupert Murdoch a few years back...?
someone who clearly believes that the needs of big business are more far important than freedom or democracy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612800</id>
	<title>A new low?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China: You no make this app available or we no make no more cheap iPhone for you!  You can make iPhone somewhere else!<br>Apple: Okay... I'll do whatever you ask.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China : You no make this app available or we no make no more cheap iPhone for you !
You can make iPhone somewhere else ! Apple : Okay... I 'll do whatever you ask .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China: You no make this app available or we no make no more cheap iPhone for you!
You can make iPhone somewhere else!Apple: Okay... I'll do whatever you ask.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613262</id>
	<title>Re:Cross another one off the list</title>
	<author>tangent3</author>
	<datestamp>1262345940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod parent +1, Naive</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent + 1 , Naive</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent +1, Naive</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613340</id>
	<title>It's called a principle.</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1262347380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a difference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614660</id>
	<title>Just Business</title>
	<author>okubax</author>
	<datestamp>1262367960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's nothing personal, glad doing business with you - from Apple to you</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's nothing personal , glad doing business with you - from Apple to you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's nothing personal, glad doing business with you - from Apple to you</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613088</id>
	<title>Re:Think Different?</title>
	<author>rastoboy29</author>
	<datestamp>1262342700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>pwned.&nbsp; nice.&nbsp; damn!</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>pwned.   nice.   damn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pwned.  nice.  damn!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614124</id>
	<title>Re:How there they...</title>
	<author>transami</author>
	<datestamp>1262362320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a difference. Freedom of Speech is considered a fundamental right. When we compromise our principles for others we risk loosing them for ourselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a difference .
Freedom of Speech is considered a fundamental right .
When we compromise our principles for others we risk loosing them for ourselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a difference.
Freedom of Speech is considered a fundamental right.
When we compromise our principles for others we risk loosing them for ourselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612994</id>
	<title>Cue all corporate apologists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262340300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who would have no problem making money off of slavery as long as it was legal</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who would have no problem making money off of slavery as long as it was legal</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who would have no problem making money off of slavery as long as it was legal</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30617412</id>
	<title>Re:Stop Them in Their Tracks!</title>
	<author>GaryPatterson</author>
	<datestamp>1262351220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're not at all worried that the Chinese government holds enough US money to cause your economy to tank overnight? If they choose to sell all of their US dollars, your country is screwed for years to come. They don't want to do that, but if you start screwing with them, they can switch to other markets and pretty much screw your country over.</p><p>If you want to play hardball, you'd better have a better plan. You can't intimidate, physically attack, legally attack or even threaten them. You need them too much. So what do you have left? I'd say try to bring them around through trade. You have no other option.</p><p>Censorship is nothing compared to your economy being made to look like the whole financial crisis was a warm up for the next Great Depression.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not at all worried that the Chinese government holds enough US money to cause your economy to tank overnight ?
If they choose to sell all of their US dollars , your country is screwed for years to come .
They do n't want to do that , but if you start screwing with them , they can switch to other markets and pretty much screw your country over.If you want to play hardball , you 'd better have a better plan .
You ca n't intimidate , physically attack , legally attack or even threaten them .
You need them too much .
So what do you have left ?
I 'd say try to bring them around through trade .
You have no other option.Censorship is nothing compared to your economy being made to look like the whole financial crisis was a warm up for the next Great Depression .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not at all worried that the Chinese government holds enough US money to cause your economy to tank overnight?
If they choose to sell all of their US dollars, your country is screwed for years to come.
They don't want to do that, but if you start screwing with them, they can switch to other markets and pretty much screw your country over.If you want to play hardball, you'd better have a better plan.
You can't intimidate, physically attack, legally attack or even threaten them.
You need them too much.
So what do you have left?
I'd say try to bring them around through trade.
You have no other option.Censorship is nothing compared to your economy being made to look like the whole financial crisis was a warm up for the next Great Depression.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613600</id>
	<title>No Surprise Here...</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1262355000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sort of news isn't surprising to anyone. You'd have to live in a cave under a rock not to realize Google and Yahoo would both feed a dead rat sandwich to their mothers if it meant a pennys profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sort of news is n't surprising to anyone .
You 'd have to live in a cave under a rock not to realize Google and Yahoo would both feed a dead rat sandwich to their mothers if it meant a pennys profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sort of news isn't surprising to anyone.
You'd have to live in a cave under a rock not to realize Google and Yahoo would both feed a dead rat sandwich to their mothers if it meant a pennys profit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612792</id>
	<title>Principals?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are they taking principals as hostages?<br>I'm not following...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are they taking principals as hostages ? I 'm not following.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are they taking principals as hostages?I'm not following...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613582</id>
	<title>Re:These are not American companies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262354760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the good old days the US was such a huge single market that many of the world's largest corporations could operate almost entirely within the US, with maybe an "export department" to deal with those funny foreigners. It is easy to describe those as "American Companies".</p><p>Those days are long gone. The creation of the EU single market, the rise of Asian economies and the fall of the USSR means that many companies genuinely are "multinational", not US companies with export departments. In many markets there is little potential for growth seen in the US or EU markets so it is Asia that is becoming a growing focus.</p><p>Overseas subsidiaries are not always "sucking away" jobs and profit from the USA, but represent separate operations in a separate part of the world. In fact, in many cases it would be more correct to say that businesses around the world outsource their capital raising and strategic management to the US. If the US becomes too hostile a place to do this the overseas parts of the business would be better off setting up a new corporate base in a friendlier jurisdiction such as Singapore. Why should the profit on a widget designed in Spain,  made in Germany and sold in France with no involvement from any US person be subject to US taxes if the ultimate holding company was set up in the US, but not if it was chartered in Germany?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the good old days the US was such a huge single market that many of the world 's largest corporations could operate almost entirely within the US , with maybe an " export department " to deal with those funny foreigners .
It is easy to describe those as " American Companies " .Those days are long gone .
The creation of the EU single market , the rise of Asian economies and the fall of the USSR means that many companies genuinely are " multinational " , not US companies with export departments .
In many markets there is little potential for growth seen in the US or EU markets so it is Asia that is becoming a growing focus.Overseas subsidiaries are not always " sucking away " jobs and profit from the USA , but represent separate operations in a separate part of the world .
In fact , in many cases it would be more correct to say that businesses around the world outsource their capital raising and strategic management to the US .
If the US becomes too hostile a place to do this the overseas parts of the business would be better off setting up a new corporate base in a friendlier jurisdiction such as Singapore .
Why should the profit on a widget designed in Spain , made in Germany and sold in France with no involvement from any US person be subject to US taxes if the ultimate holding company was set up in the US , but not if it was chartered in Germany ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the good old days the US was such a huge single market that many of the world's largest corporations could operate almost entirely within the US, with maybe an "export department" to deal with those funny foreigners.
It is easy to describe those as "American Companies".Those days are long gone.
The creation of the EU single market, the rise of Asian economies and the fall of the USSR means that many companies genuinely are "multinational", not US companies with export departments.
In many markets there is little potential for growth seen in the US or EU markets so it is Asia that is becoming a growing focus.Overseas subsidiaries are not always "sucking away" jobs and profit from the USA, but represent separate operations in a separate part of the world.
In fact, in many cases it would be more correct to say that businesses around the world outsource their capital raising and strategic management to the US.
If the US becomes too hostile a place to do this the overseas parts of the business would be better off setting up a new corporate base in a friendlier jurisdiction such as Singapore.
Why should the profit on a widget designed in Spain,  made in Germany and sold in France with no involvement from any US person be subject to US taxes if the ultimate holding company was set up in the US, but not if it was chartered in Germany?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30618896</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262360820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed the American invasion of Canada where the Americans burned many town, and subsequent retaliation by British forces which only ended with the burning of the White House.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed the American invasion of Canada where the Americans burned many town , and subsequent retaliation by British forces which only ended with the burning of the White House .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed the American invasion of Canada where the Americans burned many town, and subsequent retaliation by British forces which only ended with the burning of the White House.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613170</id>
	<title>Re:These are not American companies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262344260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems that very often I LOSE money to cheap, flimsy, and even unsafe products.  I'd love to have the option to buy products made in the rest of the world but it's just not an option.  Even if some corporate ass hat is getting a large chunk of the profits, the American consumer is getting ripped off on discussing scale.</p><p>Seriously I spend half my time at work pushing RMAs through (and not from your no name brands either).</p><p>I hate standing in line a single line behind 30 or so other customers at Walmart trying to get my money's worth.</p><p>Go ahead and tell me it's not China's fault for producing substandard products and that I, as an America, am profiting in some way from it.</p><p>As to the censorship debate?  If they care about it they can have their own revolution and I'm sure Uncle Sam will be supportive as ever.  Until then who gives a shit. I just want a working toaster oven and less phone time with India's finest RMA phone people.  If they give me that... hell I'll be there to support their revolution should THEY decide to have one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems that very often I LOSE money to cheap , flimsy , and even unsafe products .
I 'd love to have the option to buy products made in the rest of the world but it 's just not an option .
Even if some corporate ass hat is getting a large chunk of the profits , the American consumer is getting ripped off on discussing scale.Seriously I spend half my time at work pushing RMAs through ( and not from your no name brands either ) .I hate standing in line a single line behind 30 or so other customers at Walmart trying to get my money 's worth.Go ahead and tell me it 's not China 's fault for producing substandard products and that I , as an America , am profiting in some way from it.As to the censorship debate ?
If they care about it they can have their own revolution and I 'm sure Uncle Sam will be supportive as ever .
Until then who gives a shit .
I just want a working toaster oven and less phone time with India 's finest RMA phone people .
If they give me that... hell I 'll be there to support their revolution should THEY decide to have one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems that very often I LOSE money to cheap, flimsy, and even unsafe products.
I'd love to have the option to buy products made in the rest of the world but it's just not an option.
Even if some corporate ass hat is getting a large chunk of the profits, the American consumer is getting ripped off on discussing scale.Seriously I spend half my time at work pushing RMAs through (and not from your no name brands either).I hate standing in line a single line behind 30 or so other customers at Walmart trying to get my money's worth.Go ahead and tell me it's not China's fault for producing substandard products and that I, as an America, am profiting in some way from it.As to the censorship debate?
If they care about it they can have their own revolution and I'm sure Uncle Sam will be supportive as ever.
Until then who gives a shit.
I just want a working toaster oven and less phone time with India's finest RMA phone people.
If they give me that... hell I'll be there to support their revolution should THEY decide to have one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613494</id>
	<title>Well, then maybe we customers should do so too</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1262352600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i mean, let go of some principles. like, respecting copyright ownership, patent rights and so on and pirate their products like there is no tomorrow. i bet they would go berserk if we did that wouldnt they. and maybe they deserve such a hypocrisy for their own hypocrisy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i mean , let go of some principles .
like , respecting copyright ownership , patent rights and so on and pirate their products like there is no tomorrow .
i bet they would go berserk if we did that wouldnt they .
and maybe they deserve such a hypocrisy for their own hypocrisy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i mean, let go of some principles.
like, respecting copyright ownership, patent rights and so on and pirate their products like there is no tomorrow.
i bet they would go berserk if we did that wouldnt they.
and maybe they deserve such a hypocrisy for their own hypocrisy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613184</id>
	<title>Control</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262344500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, that makes sense. I mean, Chinese society is a little better fit with the Apple "way" anyway. They probably never even had to be asked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , that makes sense .
I mean , Chinese society is a little better fit with the Apple " way " anyway .
They probably never even had to be asked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, that makes sense.
I mean, Chinese society is a little better fit with the Apple "way" anyway.
They probably never even had to be asked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613260</id>
	<title>Re:How there they...</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1262345880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws.</p> </div><p>Apple doesn't have to operate in China. If it doesn't do so, it doesn't have to obey the laws that are clearly immoral (by our standards).</p><p>Of course, this is rather moot anyway so long as China remains the #1 manufacturer fueling the consumerist society in the West. You can't in good faith buy Chinese-made goods in Walmart, and then complain that Apple (or Google, or whoever) wants to be a part of Chinese market, too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sarcasm aside , what do you expect ?
Apple has to obey the country laws .
Apple does n't have to operate in China .
If it does n't do so , it does n't have to obey the laws that are clearly immoral ( by our standards ) .Of course , this is rather moot anyway so long as China remains the # 1 manufacturer fueling the consumerist society in the West .
You ca n't in good faith buy Chinese-made goods in Walmart , and then complain that Apple ( or Google , or whoever ) wants to be a part of Chinese market , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sarcasm aside, what do you expect?
Apple has to obey the country laws.
Apple doesn't have to operate in China.
If it doesn't do so, it doesn't have to obey the laws that are clearly immoral (by our standards).Of course, this is rather moot anyway so long as China remains the #1 manufacturer fueling the consumerist society in the West.
You can't in good faith buy Chinese-made goods in Walmart, and then complain that Apple (or Google, or whoever) wants to be a part of Chinese market, too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613128</id>
	<title>Re:Think Different?</title>
	<author>node 3</author>
	<datestamp>1262343420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Guess that ruins that campaign then.</p></div><p>Not really. In America (and other places, I'm sure) we're still allowed, by the government[*], to Think Different. But in China, the <i>government</i> (not Apple) outlaws thinking different.</p><p>[*] Well, for the most part.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess that ruins that campaign then.Not really .
In America ( and other places , I 'm sure ) we 're still allowed , by the government [ * ] , to Think Different .
But in China , the government ( not Apple ) outlaws thinking different .
[ * ] Well , for the most part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess that ruins that campaign then.Not really.
In America (and other places, I'm sure) we're still allowed, by the government[*], to Think Different.
But in China, the government (not Apple) outlaws thinking different.
[*] Well, for the most part.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614100</id>
	<title>If Chinese love freedom, this problem will solve..</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1262361960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Chinese love freedom, this problem will solve itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Chinese love freedom , this problem will solve itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Chinese love freedom, this problem will solve itself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613474</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262351880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This doesn't make much sense, though.</p><p>The fact is that people in China DON'T have freedom of speech (for instance). Given that, how can you expect them to truthfully answer questions about whether they'd WANT freedom of speech, when desiring freedom of speech is itself something that is prohibited under the current lack of free speech?</p><p>There's also the fact that you, of course, did not actually go to China and ask anyone.</p><p>What you're doing is essentially saying "group A is much larger than group B, therefore group B could not possibly control group A against its will", but such reasoning is fallacious. Of course there are examples in history where group A rose up against group B (the American revolution comes to mind), but if you look at history as a whole, I think you'll find that there's pretty much always been a (small) ruling class and a (large) class of serfs and servants who were kept oppressed, one way or another, to varying degrees.</p><p>Don't make the mistake of seeing humans in an overly romantic light. Most of them are cowards (although I don't intend a value judgement there), and there's always been people who have known how to exploit that. The iron law of oligarchy exists for a reason.</p><p>That said, you ARE right insofar as that the only ones that can do anything about the situation in China are the Chinese. Attempting to liberate other countries, no matter which way, is doomed to fail. You cannot lead someone into independence or freedom, for obvious reasons: if you lead them, they're not independent and free.</p><p>It makes about as much sense as dumping tons of food into Africa to erase poverty there. (Doing that may make sense under very narrow circumstances when people are literally starving to death, but other than that, it has the opposite of the intended effect, as we now know.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This does n't make much sense , though.The fact is that people in China DO N'T have freedom of speech ( for instance ) .
Given that , how can you expect them to truthfully answer questions about whether they 'd WANT freedom of speech , when desiring freedom of speech is itself something that is prohibited under the current lack of free speech ? There 's also the fact that you , of course , did not actually go to China and ask anyone.What you 're doing is essentially saying " group A is much larger than group B , therefore group B could not possibly control group A against its will " , but such reasoning is fallacious .
Of course there are examples in history where group A rose up against group B ( the American revolution comes to mind ) , but if you look at history as a whole , I think you 'll find that there 's pretty much always been a ( small ) ruling class and a ( large ) class of serfs and servants who were kept oppressed , one way or another , to varying degrees.Do n't make the mistake of seeing humans in an overly romantic light .
Most of them are cowards ( although I do n't intend a value judgement there ) , and there 's always been people who have known how to exploit that .
The iron law of oligarchy exists for a reason.That said , you ARE right insofar as that the only ones that can do anything about the situation in China are the Chinese .
Attempting to liberate other countries , no matter which way , is doomed to fail .
You can not lead someone into independence or freedom , for obvious reasons : if you lead them , they 're not independent and free.It makes about as much sense as dumping tons of food into Africa to erase poverty there .
( Doing that may make sense under very narrow circumstances when people are literally starving to death , but other than that , it has the opposite of the intended effect , as we now know .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This doesn't make much sense, though.The fact is that people in China DON'T have freedom of speech (for instance).
Given that, how can you expect them to truthfully answer questions about whether they'd WANT freedom of speech, when desiring freedom of speech is itself something that is prohibited under the current lack of free speech?There's also the fact that you, of course, did not actually go to China and ask anyone.What you're doing is essentially saying "group A is much larger than group B, therefore group B could not possibly control group A against its will", but such reasoning is fallacious.
Of course there are examples in history where group A rose up against group B (the American revolution comes to mind), but if you look at history as a whole, I think you'll find that there's pretty much always been a (small) ruling class and a (large) class of serfs and servants who were kept oppressed, one way or another, to varying degrees.Don't make the mistake of seeing humans in an overly romantic light.
Most of them are cowards (although I don't intend a value judgement there), and there's always been people who have known how to exploit that.
The iron law of oligarchy exists for a reason.That said, you ARE right insofar as that the only ones that can do anything about the situation in China are the Chinese.
Attempting to liberate other countries, no matter which way, is doomed to fail.
You cannot lead someone into independence or freedom, for obvious reasons: if you lead them, they're not independent and free.It makes about as much sense as dumping tons of food into Africa to erase poverty there.
(Doing that may make sense under very narrow circumstances when people are literally starving to death, but other than that, it has the opposite of the intended effect, as we now know.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450</id>
	<title>You're right. Law should be followed all the time</title>
	<author>IYagami</author>
	<datestamp>1262350800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?</p><p>Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts , no ? Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613062</id>
	<title>Seriously, Who Really Cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262341920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly, I don't think any of you truly care. I know I don't. Apple is just a corporation, it can, for better or for worse, sell what it likes, when it likes, where it likes, as long as it doesn't break any laws doing so. Even if it does, there's not much that could happen to it, other than a small fine.</p><p>If any of you are so enraged, stop buying Apple products (easy enough for you GNU/Linux, "my kernel don't taint" bigots), and go and protest against this in whatever way you see fit. Please, if you have a shred of sincerity, you will.</p><p>I'd personally be much more concerned about who supplies the equipment for China's great firewall, of if a nation builds a Linux supercomputer/cluster to hack/analyze/accumulate sensitive data on its population, or to test nuclear bomb designs (it's better than building them, but it's still an evil use of technology, IMO).</p><p>Besides, is any information really free of censorship? Most news in the U.S. is driven by advertising dollars and ratings potential. Your news is filtered more than your bottled water.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I do n't think any of you truly care .
I know I do n't .
Apple is just a corporation , it can , for better or for worse , sell what it likes , when it likes , where it likes , as long as it does n't break any laws doing so .
Even if it does , there 's not much that could happen to it , other than a small fine.If any of you are so enraged , stop buying Apple products ( easy enough for you GNU/Linux , " my kernel do n't taint " bigots ) , and go and protest against this in whatever way you see fit .
Please , if you have a shred of sincerity , you will.I 'd personally be much more concerned about who supplies the equipment for China 's great firewall , of if a nation builds a Linux supercomputer/cluster to hack/analyze/accumulate sensitive data on its population , or to test nuclear bomb designs ( it 's better than building them , but it 's still an evil use of technology , IMO ) .Besides , is any information really free of censorship ?
Most news in the U.S. is driven by advertising dollars and ratings potential .
Your news is filtered more than your bottled water .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I don't think any of you truly care.
I know I don't.
Apple is just a corporation, it can, for better or for worse, sell what it likes, when it likes, where it likes, as long as it doesn't break any laws doing so.
Even if it does, there's not much that could happen to it, other than a small fine.If any of you are so enraged, stop buying Apple products (easy enough for you GNU/Linux, "my kernel don't taint" bigots), and go and protest against this in whatever way you see fit.
Please, if you have a shred of sincerity, you will.I'd personally be much more concerned about who supplies the equipment for China's great firewall, of if a nation builds a Linux supercomputer/cluster to hack/analyze/accumulate sensitive data on its population, or to test nuclear bomb designs (it's better than building them, but it's still an evil use of technology, IMO).Besides, is any information really free of censorship?
Most news in the U.S. is driven by advertising dollars and ratings potential.
Your news is filtered more than your bottled water.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614270</id>
	<title>Re:Cross another one off the list</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262364000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as he doesn't know it was made in China, it's OK.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and I really don't think he'll try all that hard to examine goods either. He's satisfied as long as the company marketing it isn't visibly criticized in easily accessible media.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as he does n't know it was made in China , it 's OK. ...and I really do n't think he 'll try all that hard to examine goods either .
He 's satisfied as long as the company marketing it is n't visibly criticized in easily accessible media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as he doesn't know it was made in China, it's OK. ...and I really don't think he'll try all that hard to examine goods either.
He's satisfied as long as the company marketing it isn't visibly criticized in easily accessible media.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615656</id>
	<title>China also hates bikini girls apparently</title>
	<author>smoothlandon</author>
	<datestamp>1262378640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple is very cautious about what they allow in the store because they are a VERY big target.  The stories about difficulty getting apps approved are not exaggerated.  I tried to release a Bobble Head Obama app before the election last year and it was rejected because it "ridiculed a public figure" - I responded that caricature was not the same thing as ridicule and never heard back from anyone.

My most recent game took over a month to make it through their hoops - apparently it's ok to show massive amounts of cleavage like the infamous "Asian Boobs" app but if you have cartoon bikini chicks in the icon you've gone too far.

I finally got my game in the store but was told that it would not be sold in China.  I guess the Chinese hate girls in bikinis too!

<a href="http://bit.ly/8Q0vyA" title="bit.ly" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/8Q0vyA</a> [bit.ly]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is very cautious about what they allow in the store because they are a VERY big target .
The stories about difficulty getting apps approved are not exaggerated .
I tried to release a Bobble Head Obama app before the election last year and it was rejected because it " ridiculed a public figure " - I responded that caricature was not the same thing as ridicule and never heard back from anyone .
My most recent game took over a month to make it through their hoops - apparently it 's ok to show massive amounts of cleavage like the infamous " Asian Boobs " app but if you have cartoon bikini chicks in the icon you 've gone too far .
I finally got my game in the store but was told that it would not be sold in China .
I guess the Chinese hate girls in bikinis too !
http : //bit.ly/8Q0vyA [ bit.ly ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is very cautious about what they allow in the store because they are a VERY big target.
The stories about difficulty getting apps approved are not exaggerated.
I tried to release a Bobble Head Obama app before the election last year and it was rejected because it "ridiculed a public figure" - I responded that caricature was not the same thing as ridicule and never heard back from anyone.
My most recent game took over a month to make it through their hoops - apparently it's ok to show massive amounts of cleavage like the infamous "Asian Boobs" app but if you have cartoon bikini chicks in the icon you've gone too far.
I finally got my game in the store but was told that it would not be sold in China.
I guess the Chinese hate girls in bikinis too!
http://bit.ly/8Q0vyA [bit.ly]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615196</id>
	<title>Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit</title>
	<author>Anonymous Freak</author>
	<datestamp>1262374080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's called "Apple avoids pissing off repressive regimes that happen to control all of their manufacturing plants."</p><p>It's one thing for a website that has zero physical presence in China to thumb their nose at the regime.  At worst, Google gets blocked for a day or two; or a small web operator gets permanently banned.</p><p>It's completely separate for a company with a physical presence, and lots of money tied up on business there.  Apple (even more than Google and Yahoo,) has to do business in China; they CAN'T not follow Chinese law.  It would be business suicide.</p><p>It would be great if Apple moved their manufacturing back to the U.S.; and was willing to risk losing all their China-based sales, but they *ARE* a business.  They are a publicly-traded business, even.  If Apple threw away the Chinese market just to make a political statement, the board of directors would be thrown out in a New York Second by the stockholders.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's called " Apple avoids pissing off repressive regimes that happen to control all of their manufacturing plants .
" It 's one thing for a website that has zero physical presence in China to thumb their nose at the regime .
At worst , Google gets blocked for a day or two ; or a small web operator gets permanently banned.It 's completely separate for a company with a physical presence , and lots of money tied up on business there .
Apple ( even more than Google and Yahoo , ) has to do business in China ; they CA N'T not follow Chinese law .
It would be business suicide.It would be great if Apple moved their manufacturing back to the U.S. ; and was willing to risk losing all their China-based sales , but they * ARE * a business .
They are a publicly-traded business , even .
If Apple threw away the Chinese market just to make a political statement , the board of directors would be thrown out in a New York Second by the stockholders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's called "Apple avoids pissing off repressive regimes that happen to control all of their manufacturing plants.
"It's one thing for a website that has zero physical presence in China to thumb their nose at the regime.
At worst, Google gets blocked for a day or two; or a small web operator gets permanently banned.It's completely separate for a company with a physical presence, and lots of money tied up on business there.
Apple (even more than Google and Yahoo,) has to do business in China; they CAN'T not follow Chinese law.
It would be business suicide.It would be great if Apple moved their manufacturing back to the U.S.; and was willing to risk losing all their China-based sales, but they *ARE* a business.
They are a publicly-traded business, even.
If Apple threw away the Chinese market just to make a political statement, the board of directors would be thrown out in a New York Second by the stockholders.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30617350</id>
	<title>Company Complies with Local Laws</title>
	<author>GaryPatterson</author>
	<datestamp>1262350740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Company complies with local laws. More at 11.</p><p>Also in the bulletin, armchair commentators claim "I would do it differently," but lack any motivation or ability to do so.</p><p>Later, people criticising a nation while simultaneously lapping up everything it produces, failing to see the hypocrisy in their own actions. When questioned, they managed to compartmentalise the actions of support an oppressive regime and buying products produced under that regime.</p><p>Finally tonight, shocking news that laws are different in different nations. Many people in the US are amazed that their legal system isn't somehow carried over into the other 95\% of the planet. Even more shocking is the news that people in other nations view their rights differently to people in the US.</p><p><i>My view of the posts in this topic - moral outrage based on nothing more than hot air. Sure, China is a bad place in some ways, but if you're going to criticise a company for doing business with them in a manner acceptable to the Chinese government, then you'd better follow that up by personally not purchasing anything made by any company with links to China.  Anything less is pure hypocrisy. If you really care enough, drop the pretence of a moral high ground and talk to the average Chinese people. Get them interested in slow changes, and eventually the system will turn around. Going in with metaphorical guns blazing is a guaranteed failure with strong governments.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Company complies with local laws .
More at 11.Also in the bulletin , armchair commentators claim " I would do it differently , " but lack any motivation or ability to do so.Later , people criticising a nation while simultaneously lapping up everything it produces , failing to see the hypocrisy in their own actions .
When questioned , they managed to compartmentalise the actions of support an oppressive regime and buying products produced under that regime.Finally tonight , shocking news that laws are different in different nations .
Many people in the US are amazed that their legal system is n't somehow carried over into the other 95 \ % of the planet .
Even more shocking is the news that people in other nations view their rights differently to people in the US.My view of the posts in this topic - moral outrage based on nothing more than hot air .
Sure , China is a bad place in some ways , but if you 're going to criticise a company for doing business with them in a manner acceptable to the Chinese government , then you 'd better follow that up by personally not purchasing anything made by any company with links to China .
Anything less is pure hypocrisy .
If you really care enough , drop the pretence of a moral high ground and talk to the average Chinese people .
Get them interested in slow changes , and eventually the system will turn around .
Going in with metaphorical guns blazing is a guaranteed failure with strong governments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Company complies with local laws.
More at 11.Also in the bulletin, armchair commentators claim "I would do it differently," but lack any motivation or ability to do so.Later, people criticising a nation while simultaneously lapping up everything it produces, failing to see the hypocrisy in their own actions.
When questioned, they managed to compartmentalise the actions of support an oppressive regime and buying products produced under that regime.Finally tonight, shocking news that laws are different in different nations.
Many people in the US are amazed that their legal system isn't somehow carried over into the other 95\% of the planet.
Even more shocking is the news that people in other nations view their rights differently to people in the US.My view of the posts in this topic - moral outrage based on nothing more than hot air.
Sure, China is a bad place in some ways, but if you're going to criticise a company for doing business with them in a manner acceptable to the Chinese government, then you'd better follow that up by personally not purchasing anything made by any company with links to China.
Anything less is pure hypocrisy.
If you really care enough, drop the pretence of a moral high ground and talk to the average Chinese people.
Get them interested in slow changes, and eventually the system will turn around.
Going in with metaphorical guns blazing is a guaranteed failure with strong governments.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613636</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1262355540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of those 1.299 billion people, many will be physically unable to fight (too old, disabled, very young etc)...<br>Many more will simply be unwilling to, there is no way you can motivate an entire population like that... And since there would be a high risk of death, people would need to be very motivated to act.<br>And even if you tried, how would you get the word out to so many people, when the government controls all the mass communications systems?</p><p>In this modern age, it's simply impossible to motivate enough people to overthrow an entrenched government...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of those 1.299 billion people , many will be physically unable to fight ( too old , disabled , very young etc ) ...Many more will simply be unwilling to , there is no way you can motivate an entire population like that... And since there would be a high risk of death , people would need to be very motivated to act.And even if you tried , how would you get the word out to so many people , when the government controls all the mass communications systems ? In this modern age , it 's simply impossible to motivate enough people to overthrow an entrenched government.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of those 1.299 billion people, many will be physically unable to fight (too old, disabled, very young etc)...Many more will simply be unwilling to, there is no way you can motivate an entire population like that... And since there would be a high risk of death, people would need to be very motivated to act.And even if you tried, how would you get the word out to so many people, when the government controls all the mass communications systems?In this modern age, it's simply impossible to motivate enough people to overthrow an entrenched government...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790</id>
	<title>The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They care about their rights to make <i>money</i>.</p><p>I mean seriously, do you REALLY think it would be easy to oppress 1.299 BILLION angry people with 1 million armed soldiers if the majority gave a shit? Yeah, me neither.</p><p>The Chinese don't give a shit about freedom of speech et al, so long as they're free to make money. Ask any of them about freedom of speech (outside of MAYBE a few really liberal by Chinese standards journalists), and they'll bluntly tell you they don't give a shit. They want to make MONEY, and that's it.</p><p>So long as the Chinese people don't give a shit about freedom of speech, there's no point in caring about it for them. As much as I'd like to help them, they're the only ones that can do anything about it. And they won't any time soon. Let's worry about our own freedoms instead, so that one day when they DO care we're available to help if they happen to need it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They care about their rights to make money.I mean seriously , do you REALLY think it would be easy to oppress 1.299 BILLION angry people with 1 million armed soldiers if the majority gave a shit ?
Yeah , me neither.The Chinese do n't give a shit about freedom of speech et al , so long as they 're free to make money .
Ask any of them about freedom of speech ( outside of MAYBE a few really liberal by Chinese standards journalists ) , and they 'll bluntly tell you they do n't give a shit .
They want to make MONEY , and that 's it.So long as the Chinese people do n't give a shit about freedom of speech , there 's no point in caring about it for them .
As much as I 'd like to help them , they 're the only ones that can do anything about it .
And they wo n't any time soon .
Let 's worry about our own freedoms instead , so that one day when they DO care we 're available to help if they happen to need it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They care about their rights to make money.I mean seriously, do you REALLY think it would be easy to oppress 1.299 BILLION angry people with 1 million armed soldiers if the majority gave a shit?
Yeah, me neither.The Chinese don't give a shit about freedom of speech et al, so long as they're free to make money.
Ask any of them about freedom of speech (outside of MAYBE a few really liberal by Chinese standards journalists), and they'll bluntly tell you they don't give a shit.
They want to make MONEY, and that's it.So long as the Chinese people don't give a shit about freedom of speech, there's no point in caring about it for them.
As much as I'd like to help them, they're the only ones that can do anything about it.
And they won't any time soon.
Let's worry about our own freedoms instead, so that one day when they DO care we're available to help if they happen to need it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876</id>
	<title>These are not American companies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262338320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I keep telling people that these "American Companies" aren't American at all. Fewer and fewer of their worker's are American, their ideals are not American and their tax revenue isn't reported in America.</p><p>As a people, we need to take back America</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I keep telling people that these " American Companies " are n't American at all .
Fewer and fewer of their worker 's are American , their ideals are not American and their tax revenue is n't reported in America.As a people , we need to take back America</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I keep telling people that these "American Companies" aren't American at all.
Fewer and fewer of their worker's are American, their ideals are not American and their tax revenue isn't reported in America.As a people, we need to take back America</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612808</id>
	<title>Note to editors: learn to FUCKING SPELL!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in <b>principals</b>.</p></div><p>Oh really? What's the principals to USD exchange rate these days? Do we really have so many extra that we can give them to the Chinese?</p><p>Just because the red underline goes away doesn't mean the word is correct, editors...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principals.Oh really ?
What 's the principals to USD exchange rate these days ?
Do we really have so many extra that we can give them to the Chinese ? Just because the red underline goes away does n't mean the word is correct , editors.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principals.Oh really?
What's the principals to USD exchange rate these days?
Do we really have so many extra that we can give them to the Chinese?Just because the red underline goes away doesn't mean the word is correct, editors...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613434</id>
	<title>Re:Cross another one off the list</title>
	<author>Bartab</author>
	<datestamp>1262350080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I approve of your choice to sell Apple, Google, Yahoo and other stocks that operate profitably. Your, and others of similar stances, choice to sell depresses the market price of the stock allowing people like me to buy it undervalued.</p><p>Thank you, and please keep purchasing those iPhones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I approve of your choice to sell Apple , Google , Yahoo and other stocks that operate profitably .
Your , and others of similar stances , choice to sell depresses the market price of the stock allowing people like me to buy it undervalued.Thank you , and please keep purchasing those iPhones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I approve of your choice to sell Apple, Google, Yahoo and other stocks that operate profitably.
Your, and others of similar stances, choice to sell depresses the market price of the stock allowing people like me to buy it undervalued.Thank you, and please keep purchasing those iPhones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613856</id>
	<title>ROCKS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262358480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple Censorship just ROCKS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple Censorship just ROCKS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple Censorship just ROCKS!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615012</id>
	<title>Re:You're right. Law should be followed all the ti</title>
	<author>Reservoir Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1262371920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Rosa parks was a citizen of the USA and she did not have much choice but to fight for her freedom, I respect her courage greatly for that. But coming to another country a foreigner should obey local laws, and if due to ethical dilemmas he is not able to do just that he always has a choice of returning to his own country. Somebody has pointed a great example - if I come to the USA, go to a hospital and start demanding free surgeries just because in my country universal health care is a human right, I'd be probably laughed off and deported.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rosa parks was a citizen of the USA and she did not have much choice but to fight for her freedom , I respect her courage greatly for that .
But coming to another country a foreigner should obey local laws , and if due to ethical dilemmas he is not able to do just that he always has a choice of returning to his own country .
Somebody has pointed a great example - if I come to the USA , go to a hospital and start demanding free surgeries just because in my country universal health care is a human right , I 'd be probably laughed off and deported .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rosa parks was a citizen of the USA and she did not have much choice but to fight for her freedom, I respect her courage greatly for that.
But coming to another country a foreigner should obey local laws, and if due to ethical dilemmas he is not able to do just that he always has a choice of returning to his own country.
Somebody has pointed a great example - if I come to the USA, go to a hospital and start demanding free surgeries just because in my country universal health care is a human right, I'd be probably laughed off and deported.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613492</id>
	<title>Re:How there they...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262352540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't free market capitalism supposed to help spread freedom and democracy around the world?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't free market capitalism supposed to help spread freedom and democracy around the world ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't free market capitalism supposed to help spread freedom and democracy around the world?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866</id>
	<title>Oh FFS Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262338140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>but a very large price to pay for that in principals</p></div></blockquote><p>This is not how businesses work. You either comply with the laws of a country or you don't get to do business. It's not the modus operandi of corporations to fight for principals.</p><p>Do people writing these summaries not understand how the real world works?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but a very large price to pay for that in principalsThis is not how businesses work .
You either comply with the laws of a country or you do n't get to do business .
It 's not the modus operandi of corporations to fight for principals.Do people writing these summaries not understand how the real world works ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but a very large price to pay for that in principalsThis is not how businesses work.
You either comply with the laws of a country or you don't get to do business.
It's not the modus operandi of corporations to fight for principals.Do people writing these summaries not understand how the real world works?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613282</id>
	<title>Principles</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262346180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looking at the comments around, I'd say it seems far easier to demand that someone else follow your set of principles... than to follow them yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looking at the comments around , I 'd say it seems far easier to demand that someone else follow your set of principles... than to follow them yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looking at the comments around, I'd say it seems far easier to demand that someone else follow your set of principles... than to follow them yourself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612964</id>
	<title>Re:These are not American companies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262339640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their lobbyists are certainly 100\% Grade A American though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their lobbyists are certainly 100 \ % Grade A American though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their lobbyists are certainly 100\% Grade A American though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613300</id>
	<title>Stupid</title>
	<author>anonieuweling</author>
	<datestamp>1262346540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's stupid comments about local laws.<br>
It appears that people do not discern any difference between laws and ethics.<br>
Not everything that is forbidden by law is unethical.<br>
Not all that is bad is forbidden by law.<br>
And companies without the least of a spine are dime-a-dozen.<br>
What is apple doing to explain the chinese that this is 'not so nice'?<br>
Same for other situations that are in the way of truly free markets? (yes, markets aren't free, even yours isn't free)</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's stupid comments about local laws .
It appears that people do not discern any difference between laws and ethics .
Not everything that is forbidden by law is unethical .
Not all that is bad is forbidden by law .
And companies without the least of a spine are dime-a-dozen .
What is apple doing to explain the chinese that this is 'not so nice ' ?
Same for other situations that are in the way of truly free markets ?
( yes , markets are n't free , even yours is n't free )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's stupid comments about local laws.
It appears that people do not discern any difference between laws and ethics.
Not everything that is forbidden by law is unethical.
Not all that is bad is forbidden by law.
And companies without the least of a spine are dime-a-dozen.
What is apple doing to explain the chinese that this is 'not so nice'?
Same for other situations that are in the way of truly free markets?
(yes, markets aren't free, even yours isn't free)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612932</id>
	<title>Re:A new low?</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1262339340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many times do we have to go through this nonsense?</p><p>Pick your battles.  Isolationism, the result of failing to abide by foreign laws, is a losing strategy, so it would be foolish for US corporations not to compromise.  In exchange for compliance with the law -- law that won't change as a result of failure to comply on the part of foreign corporations -- we have the presence of US companies, services, and products in China, which is beneficial both economically and (in the long run) socially and politically.</p><p>Or do you turn down a paycheck every time you feel a superior didn't respect your values enough?</p><p>That's what I thought...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many times do we have to go through this nonsense ? Pick your battles .
Isolationism , the result of failing to abide by foreign laws , is a losing strategy , so it would be foolish for US corporations not to compromise .
In exchange for compliance with the law -- law that wo n't change as a result of failure to comply on the part of foreign corporations -- we have the presence of US companies , services , and products in China , which is beneficial both economically and ( in the long run ) socially and politically.Or do you turn down a paycheck every time you feel a superior did n't respect your values enough ? That 's what I thought.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many times do we have to go through this nonsense?Pick your battles.
Isolationism, the result of failing to abide by foreign laws, is a losing strategy, so it would be foolish for US corporations not to compromise.
In exchange for compliance with the law -- law that won't change as a result of failure to comply on the part of foreign corporations -- we have the presence of US companies, services, and products in China, which is beneficial both economically and (in the long run) socially and politically.Or do you turn down a paycheck every time you feel a superior didn't respect your values enough?That's what I thought...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614210</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262363400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Statistically I'd say that US involvement is more likely to be positive than negative. Enumerated:
<br> <br>
Mexican-American War: Substantially positive effects on acquired territory.<br>
Spanish-American War: Substantially positive effects for Puerto Rico and Guam, less so but still positive for the Philippines... Cuba not so much, the degree of which depending on whether you want to blame the revolution on the US.<br>
World War II: Positive effects for numerous occupied territories, Japan, Germany, former Japanese Pacific island mandates too numerous/small to list...<br>
Korean War: Substantially positive effects on South Korea<br>
Vietnam War: Negative effects, but to be fair, what happened in post-war Vietnam is what the Vietnamese did to themselves, we lost the war and had no further direct impact on Vietnam's development. (And if we hadn't been involved at all, the South just would have lost more quickly and the same things/conditions would have happened faster.)<br>
Grenada: Positive effects<br>
Panama: Probably barely net positive, but hard to say considering how little Panama has advanced and how much collateral damage was done.<br>
Kuwait: Substantially positive effects<br>
Somalia: The place was so messed up when we started there I don't think it was substantially more messed up when we left, and just like Vietnam the Somalis themselves must shoulder the responsibility for their condition after our withdrawal.<br>
Balkans: Net positive effects<br>
Afghanistan: Net positive effects, primarily because the country was practically starting from zero.<br>
Iraq: Substantially positive effects in the north, substantially negative effects in the south. It's too bad Turkey is such a bitch about Kurds, otherwise it would make a lot of sense to just split Iraq and salvage what's working.<br> <br>
So there you are, even if we assume that what countries do to themselves after we leave is our fault, that's still round about an 80\% rate of positive effects to places we have occupied.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Statistically I 'd say that US involvement is more likely to be positive than negative .
Enumerated : Mexican-American War : Substantially positive effects on acquired territory .
Spanish-American War : Substantially positive effects for Puerto Rico and Guam , less so but still positive for the Philippines... Cuba not so much , the degree of which depending on whether you want to blame the revolution on the US .
World War II : Positive effects for numerous occupied territories , Japan , Germany , former Japanese Pacific island mandates too numerous/small to list.. . Korean War : Substantially positive effects on South Korea Vietnam War : Negative effects , but to be fair , what happened in post-war Vietnam is what the Vietnamese did to themselves , we lost the war and had no further direct impact on Vietnam 's development .
( And if we had n't been involved at all , the South just would have lost more quickly and the same things/conditions would have happened faster .
) Grenada : Positive effects Panama : Probably barely net positive , but hard to say considering how little Panama has advanced and how much collateral damage was done .
Kuwait : Substantially positive effects Somalia : The place was so messed up when we started there I do n't think it was substantially more messed up when we left , and just like Vietnam the Somalis themselves must shoulder the responsibility for their condition after our withdrawal .
Balkans : Net positive effects Afghanistan : Net positive effects , primarily because the country was practically starting from zero .
Iraq : Substantially positive effects in the north , substantially negative effects in the south .
It 's too bad Turkey is such a bitch about Kurds , otherwise it would make a lot of sense to just split Iraq and salvage what 's working .
So there you are , even if we assume that what countries do to themselves after we leave is our fault , that 's still round about an 80 \ % rate of positive effects to places we have occupied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Statistically I'd say that US involvement is more likely to be positive than negative.
Enumerated:
 
Mexican-American War: Substantially positive effects on acquired territory.
Spanish-American War: Substantially positive effects for Puerto Rico and Guam, less so but still positive for the Philippines... Cuba not so much, the degree of which depending on whether you want to blame the revolution on the US.
World War II: Positive effects for numerous occupied territories, Japan, Germany, former Japanese Pacific island mandates too numerous/small to list...
Korean War: Substantially positive effects on South Korea
Vietnam War: Negative effects, but to be fair, what happened in post-war Vietnam is what the Vietnamese did to themselves, we lost the war and had no further direct impact on Vietnam's development.
(And if we hadn't been involved at all, the South just would have lost more quickly and the same things/conditions would have happened faster.
)
Grenada: Positive effects
Panama: Probably barely net positive, but hard to say considering how little Panama has advanced and how much collateral damage was done.
Kuwait: Substantially positive effects
Somalia: The place was so messed up when we started there I don't think it was substantially more messed up when we left, and just like Vietnam the Somalis themselves must shoulder the responsibility for their condition after our withdrawal.
Balkans: Net positive effects
Afghanistan: Net positive effects, primarily because the country was practically starting from zero.
Iraq: Substantially positive effects in the north, substantially negative effects in the south.
It's too bad Turkey is such a bitch about Kurds, otherwise it would make a lot of sense to just split Iraq and salvage what's working.
So there you are, even if we assume that what countries do to themselves after we leave is our fault, that's still round about an 80\% rate of positive effects to places we have occupied.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614784</id>
	<title>Re:How there they...</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1262369220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't.</p></div><p>Rights are not given by the state, they are recognized.  You should have said:<br>
Free speech is not a recognized right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, China attempts to control speech.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Free speech is not a right in China , no matter how much we think everyone should have it , it just is n't.Rights are not given by the state , they are recognized .
You should have said : Free speech is not a recognized right in China , no matter how much we think everyone should have it , China attempts to control speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't.Rights are not given by the state, they are recognized.
You should have said:
Free speech is not a recognized right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, China attempts to control speech.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613060</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262341920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same applies to my beloved Android phone too. That is, if you don't buy any carrier-locked model, but that's a problem only for Americans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same applies to my beloved Android phone too .
That is , if you do n't buy any carrier-locked model , but that 's a problem only for Americans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same applies to my beloved Android phone too.
That is, if you don't buy any carrier-locked model, but that's a problem only for Americans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613156</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262343840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how about a free Detroit, Bedstuy, or East LA</p><p>I don't think the app would sell anyway. Most PRC Han Chinese think that the whole free tibet movement was started by US intelligence officers to undermine any far left western support of a the chinese government. Therefore they are not at all sympathetic and probably would not  buy the app since they are the only group that could actually afford legit iphones.<br>what law? the law of popular opinion?<br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai\_Lama#Introduction\_of\_the\_Dalai\_Lama\_i...<br>2nd paragraph</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how about a free Detroit , Bedstuy , or East LAI do n't think the app would sell anyway .
Most PRC Han Chinese think that the whole free tibet movement was started by US intelligence officers to undermine any far left western support of a the chinese government .
Therefore they are not at all sympathetic and probably would not buy the app since they are the only group that could actually afford legit iphones.what law ?
the law of popular opinion ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai \ _Lama # Introduction \ _of \ _the \ _Dalai \ _Lama \ _i...2nd paragraph</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how about a free Detroit, Bedstuy, or East LAI don't think the app would sell anyway.
Most PRC Han Chinese think that the whole free tibet movement was started by US intelligence officers to undermine any far left western support of a the chinese government.
Therefore they are not at all sympathetic and probably would not  buy the app since they are the only group that could actually afford legit iphones.what law?
the law of popular opinion?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai\_Lama#Introduction\_of\_the\_Dalai\_Lama\_i...2nd paragraph</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614110</id>
	<title>Microsoft?</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1262362080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmmm. I seem to recall that Microsoft was the first search engine to cave into Chinese demand to censorship, as well as turning over their source code to China, and that Google at least showed that a link was censored. So, why is it, that MS is not mentioned in the header?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm .
I seem to recall that Microsoft was the first search engine to cave into Chinese demand to censorship , as well as turning over their source code to China , and that Google at least showed that a link was censored .
So , why is it , that MS is not mentioned in the header ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm.
I seem to recall that Microsoft was the first search engine to cave into Chinese demand to censorship, as well as turning over their source code to China, and that Google at least showed that a link was censored.
So, why is it, that MS is not mentioned in the header?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613456</id>
	<title>Apple Supplier Code of Conduct</title>
	<author>evilsofa</author>
	<datestamp>1262350860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You would think from this thread that Apple has never advocated for human rights in China:<br>

<a href="http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/</a> [apple.com]
<br>
Isn't it better for Apple to do it that way than to piss off the country that manufactures nearly everything Apple sells?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You would think from this thread that Apple has never advocated for human rights in China : http : //www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/ [ apple.com ] Is n't it better for Apple to do it that way than to piss off the country that manufactures nearly everything Apple sells ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You would think from this thread that Apple has never advocated for human rights in China:

http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/ [apple.com]

Isn't it better for Apple to do it that way than to piss off the country that manufactures nearly everything Apple sells?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613332</id>
	<title>Fuck Tenzin Gyatso</title>
	<author>For a Free Internet</author>
	<datestamp>1262347320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That CIA flunky and agent of counterrevolution!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That CIA flunky and agent of counterrevolution !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That CIA flunky and agent of counterrevolution!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613190</id>
	<title>Re:Oh FFS Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262344560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you consider parents' basement part of the real world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you consider parents ' basement part of the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you consider parents' basement part of the real world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814</id>
	<title>Think Different?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262376300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Guess that ruins <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/difference/130954070" title="flickr.com" rel="nofollow">that campaign</a> [flickr.com] then.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess that ruins that campaign [ flickr.com ] then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess that ruins that campaign [flickr.com] then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850</id>
	<title>How there they...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262337960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws!? What next? Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it? What about freedom?!!

</p><p>Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws. Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't. It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws ! ?
What next ?
Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it ?
What about freedom ? ! !
Sarcasm aside , what do you expect ?
Apple has to obey the country laws .
Free speech is not a right in China , no matter how much we think everyone should have it , it just is n't .
It 's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it 's people the right of socialized medicine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws!?
What next?
Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it?
What about freedom?!!
Sarcasm aside, what do you expect?
Apple has to obey the country laws.
Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't.
It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>sydneyfong</author>
	<datestamp>1262347080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It wasn't that long ago when China was really an underdeveloped country, with the majority of the population without sufficient daily necessities such as food and shelter. Talk to them about freedoms and of course that will on deaf ears.</p><p>Today a sizable part of China is prosperous almost on par with the first world. It wouldn't be long until these people demand more freedoms and rights.</p><p>What I think the Chinese government is really concerned though, is not about its citizens having more freedoms and rights. Rather, it is the eagerness of the west to "help" the "revolution".</p><p>Honestly, we've all seen what happens when the righteous Uncle Sam and the west "liberates" a country. Iraq? Afghanistan? If you read up Chinese 19-20th century history, you'll realize that a lot of invasions were under various "nice" pretexts, notably the "Greater Asia" slogan used by the Japanese to "rid Asia of colonial powers".</p><p>I'm sure you don't have these ulterior motives, but please face the fact: your "help" to other countries "for their own good", is much more likely to make it a hellhole than achieving something positive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was n't that long ago when China was really an underdeveloped country , with the majority of the population without sufficient daily necessities such as food and shelter .
Talk to them about freedoms and of course that will on deaf ears.Today a sizable part of China is prosperous almost on par with the first world .
It would n't be long until these people demand more freedoms and rights.What I think the Chinese government is really concerned though , is not about its citizens having more freedoms and rights .
Rather , it is the eagerness of the west to " help " the " revolution " .Honestly , we 've all seen what happens when the righteous Uncle Sam and the west " liberates " a country .
Iraq ? Afghanistan ?
If you read up Chinese 19-20th century history , you 'll realize that a lot of invasions were under various " nice " pretexts , notably the " Greater Asia " slogan used by the Japanese to " rid Asia of colonial powers " .I 'm sure you do n't have these ulterior motives , but please face the fact : your " help " to other countries " for their own good " , is much more likely to make it a hellhole than achieving something positive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It wasn't that long ago when China was really an underdeveloped country, with the majority of the population without sufficient daily necessities such as food and shelter.
Talk to them about freedoms and of course that will on deaf ears.Today a sizable part of China is prosperous almost on par with the first world.
It wouldn't be long until these people demand more freedoms and rights.What I think the Chinese government is really concerned though, is not about its citizens having more freedoms and rights.
Rather, it is the eagerness of the west to "help" the "revolution".Honestly, we've all seen what happens when the righteous Uncle Sam and the west "liberates" a country.
Iraq? Afghanistan?
If you read up Chinese 19-20th century history, you'll realize that a lot of invasions were under various "nice" pretexts, notably the "Greater Asia" slogan used by the Japanese to "rid Asia of colonial powers".I'm sure you don't have these ulterior motives, but please face the fact: your "help" to other countries "for their own good", is much more likely to make it a hellhole than achieving something positive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614642</id>
	<title>Let's see here...</title>
	<author>Legion303</author>
	<datestamp>1262367780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple (along with any other company in its position) can do business in China according to its laws, Break China's laws, or refuse to do business in China. Only one of these options is guaranteed to make these companies money. If you think they're going to choose idealism over cash, you have some high-grade pot at your disposal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple ( along with any other company in its position ) can do business in China according to its laws , Break China 's laws , or refuse to do business in China .
Only one of these options is guaranteed to make these companies money .
If you think they 're going to choose idealism over cash , you have some high-grade pot at your disposal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple (along with any other company in its position) can do business in China according to its laws, Break China's laws, or refuse to do business in China.
Only one of these options is guaranteed to make these companies money.
If you think they're going to choose idealism over cash, you have some high-grade pot at your disposal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614166</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>tonycheese</author>
	<datestamp>1262362740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is absolutely right on the money. A few decades ago, 99\% of the population there could never eat their fill.</p><p>People do not demand luxuries unless they have basic food and shelter covered. If half your town was starving, who the fuck would care about freedom of speech? Feeding your children comes first; you can call it "greed" if you want, but they're still getting over the fact that most of them can actually eat as much as they want now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is absolutely right on the money .
A few decades ago , 99 \ % of the population there could never eat their fill.People do not demand luxuries unless they have basic food and shelter covered .
If half your town was starving , who the fuck would care about freedom of speech ?
Feeding your children comes first ; you can call it " greed " if you want , but they 're still getting over the fact that most of them can actually eat as much as they want now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is absolutely right on the money.
A few decades ago, 99\% of the population there could never eat their fill.People do not demand luxuries unless they have basic food and shelter covered.
If half your town was starving, who the fuck would care about freedom of speech?
Feeding your children comes first; you can call it "greed" if you want, but they're still getting over the fact that most of them can actually eat as much as they want now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612930</id>
	<title>Principles?</title>
	<author>Shoe Puppet</author>
	<datestamp>1262339280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since when does Apple have any principles it could pay with?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when does Apple have any principles it could pay with ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when does Apple have any principles it could pay with?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613000</id>
	<title>overlooked bombshell in summary...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262340360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dalai Lama is coding iPhone apps!?!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dalai Lama is coding iPhone apps ! ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dalai Lama is coding iPhone apps!?!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615382</id>
	<title>Re:You're right. Law should be followed all the ti</title>
	<author>ThrowAwaySociety</author>
	<datestamp>1262376000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?</p><p>Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.</p></div><p>So you're saying that every black person who wasn't Rosa Parks should be condemned for not standing up for their rights?</p><p>Some people (and, naturally, most companies) just want to go about their business without getting in trouble. This is not a moral weakness on their part. Not everyone is a born crusader.</p><p>By the way, what have you done to protest censorship in China recently? Nothing? Then STFU already.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts , no ? Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.So you 're saying that every black person who was n't Rosa Parks should be condemned for not standing up for their rights ? Some people ( and , naturally , most companies ) just want to go about their business without getting in trouble .
This is not a moral weakness on their part .
Not everyone is a born crusader.By the way , what have you done to protest censorship in China recently ?
Nothing ? Then STFU already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.So you're saying that every black person who wasn't Rosa Parks should be condemned for not standing up for their rights?Some people (and, naturally, most companies) just want to go about their business without getting in trouble.
This is not a moral weakness on their part.
Not everyone is a born crusader.By the way, what have you done to protest censorship in China recently?
Nothing? Then STFU already.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614572</id>
	<title>orthographic ambiguity</title>
	<author>LandruBek</author>
	<datestamp>1262367060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously!  My new-year morning cobweb-covered mind was puzzled, thinking to itself, "Why are they saying *Apple* pays in 'in principals?'  The Chinese struggle for freedom is constantly paying in principals, such as Wang Xiaoning, and it *is* a bitter price, but what do they have to do with Apple?"  Then, uh, duh.</p><p>(But I do love me some orthographic ambiguities.  See also "smote the sledded pole-ax on the ice" vs. "smote the sledded Polacks on the ice.")</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously !
My new-year morning cobweb-covered mind was puzzled , thinking to itself , " Why are they saying * Apple * pays in 'in principals ?
' The Chinese struggle for freedom is constantly paying in principals , such as Wang Xiaoning , and it * is * a bitter price , but what do they have to do with Apple ?
" Then , uh , duh .
( But I do love me some orthographic ambiguities .
See also " smote the sledded pole-ax on the ice " vs. " smote the sledded Polacks on the ice .
" )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously!
My new-year morning cobweb-covered mind was puzzled, thinking to itself, "Why are they saying *Apple* pays in 'in principals?
'  The Chinese struggle for freedom is constantly paying in principals, such as Wang Xiaoning, and it *is* a bitter price, but what do they have to do with Apple?
"  Then, uh, duh.
(But I do love me some orthographic ambiguities.
See also "smote the sledded pole-ax on the ice" vs. "smote the sledded Polacks on the ice.
")</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613364</id>
	<title>Re:Cross another one off the list</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1262347860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613478</id>
	<title>Stop Them in Their Tracks!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262351880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>          Here in America we can stop these censoring nations. We can revoke the business permits for any company inside the US that practices doing business with censoring nations. We might also consider criminal charges for violations of human rights for anyone who causes or contributes to censorship up to and including US officials who seek to censor porn within the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here in America we can stop these censoring nations .
We can revoke the business permits for any company inside the US that practices doing business with censoring nations .
We might also consider criminal charges for violations of human rights for anyone who causes or contributes to censorship up to and including US officials who seek to censor porn within the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>          Here in America we can stop these censoring nations.
We can revoke the business permits for any company inside the US that practices doing business with censoring nations.
We might also consider criminal charges for violations of human rights for anyone who causes or contributes to censorship up to and including US officials who seek to censor porn within the US.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614328</id>
	<title>Enemy of my enemy is my friend?</title>
	<author>superyanthrax</author>
	<datestamp>1262364660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funny how the Cold War "enemy of my enemy is my friend" train of thought induces supposed defenders of freedom and liberty (i.e. Americans and the West) to support a brutal dictator (the Dalai Lama) who would impose slavery, poverty, and theocracy on Tibet and its people, and who would try his damnedest sell out Tibet to the British just so he can continue lording and abusing the area as his personal fiefdom.

Also, I didn't know Apple had to pay in grade school directors for following Chinese laws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny how the Cold War " enemy of my enemy is my friend " train of thought induces supposed defenders of freedom and liberty ( i.e .
Americans and the West ) to support a brutal dictator ( the Dalai Lama ) who would impose slavery , poverty , and theocracy on Tibet and its people , and who would try his damnedest sell out Tibet to the British just so he can continue lording and abusing the area as his personal fiefdom .
Also , I did n't know Apple had to pay in grade school directors for following Chinese laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny how the Cold War "enemy of my enemy is my friend" train of thought induces supposed defenders of freedom and liberty (i.e.
Americans and the West) to support a brutal dictator (the Dalai Lama) who would impose slavery, poverty, and theocracy on Tibet and its people, and who would try his damnedest sell out Tibet to the British just so he can continue lording and abusing the area as his personal fiefdom.
Also, I didn't know Apple had to pay in grade school directors for following Chinese laws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613266</id>
	<title>Re:These are not American companies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262346000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Allie Fox, is that you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Allie Fox , is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Allie Fox, is that you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612886</id>
	<title>Re:lol first post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262338440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ha! FAILed it!<br>
FTFY<br>
troll<br>
noob</htmltext>
<tokenext>ha !
FAILed it !
FTFY troll noob</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ha!
FAILed it!
FTFY
troll
noob</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612948</id>
	<title>Proofreading fails again</title>
	<author>tardibear</author>
	<datestamp>1262339460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The word is <i>principles</i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The word is principles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The word is principles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612826</id>
	<title>Freedom!</title>
	<author>kurt555gs</author>
	<datestamp>1262337540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some here have commented about my enthusiasm of the Nokia N900, and this would be a perfect example. With Maemo5 as the OS, NO ONE but you decides what or how you will operate this device.</p><p>TO me, this in it's self means an awful lot!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some here have commented about my enthusiasm of the Nokia N900 , and this would be a perfect example .
With Maemo5 as the OS , NO ONE but you decides what or how you will operate this device.TO me , this in it 's self means an awful lot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some here have commented about my enthusiasm of the Nokia N900, and this would be a perfect example.
With Maemo5 as the OS, NO ONE but you decides what or how you will operate this device.TO me, this in it's self means an awful lot!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613242</id>
	<title>Re:How there they...</title>
	<author>Doctorer</author>
	<datestamp>1262345460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws. Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't. It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws!? What next? Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it? What about freedom?!!

</p><p>Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws. Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't. It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.</p></div><p>Free speech is a right in China, and in any other sovereign jurisdiction. It is a right despite the country trampling on it, because human rights don't come from the whimsical concessions of governments.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sarcasm aside , what do you expect ?
Apple has to obey the country laws .
Free speech is not a right in China , no matter how much we think everyone should have it , it just is n't .
It 's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it 's people the right of socialized medicine.How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws ! ?
What next ?
Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it ?
What about freedom ? ! !
Sarcasm aside , what do you expect ?
Apple has to obey the country laws .
Free speech is not a right in China , no matter how much we think everyone should have it , it just is n't .
It 's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it 's people the right of socialized medicine.Free speech is a right in China , and in any other sovereign jurisdiction .
It is a right despite the country trampling on it , because human rights do n't come from the whimsical concessions of governments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sarcasm aside, what do you expect?
Apple has to obey the country laws.
Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't.
It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws!?
What next?
Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it?
What about freedom?!!
Sarcasm aside, what do you expect?
Apple has to obey the country laws.
Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't.
It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.Free speech is a right in China, and in any other sovereign jurisdiction.
It is a right despite the country trampling on it, because human rights don't come from the whimsical concessions of governments.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613764</id>
	<title>Re:These are not American companies</title>
	<author>Thoreauly Nuts</author>
	<datestamp>1262357040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&ldquo;Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains. &ldquo; ---Thomas Jefferson</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>   Merchants have no country .
The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains .
   ---Thomas Jefferson</tokentext>
<sentencetext>“Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains.
“ ---Thomas Jefferson</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613256</id>
	<title>Re:Oh FFS Slashdot</title>
	<author>sydneyfong</author>
	<datestamp>1262345880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or alternatively, people who "naively" write these summaries are those who know exactly how the world works -- hordes of naive people on slashdot would take the bait hence extra page hits.</p><p>Honestly this stuff is getting old. No company in China is going to survive a second if they allow these "political sensitive" stuff to be published uncensored....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or alternatively , people who " naively " write these summaries are those who know exactly how the world works -- hordes of naive people on slashdot would take the bait hence extra page hits.Honestly this stuff is getting old .
No company in China is going to survive a second if they allow these " political sensitive " stuff to be published uncensored... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or alternatively, people who "naively" write these summaries are those who know exactly how the world works -- hordes of naive people on slashdot would take the bait hence extra page hits.Honestly this stuff is getting old.
No company in China is going to survive a second if they allow these "political sensitive" stuff to be published uncensored....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612960</id>
	<title>Re:These are not American companies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262339580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I keep telling people that these "American Companies" aren't American at all. Fewer and fewer of their worker's are American, their ideals are not American and their tax revenue isn't reported in America.</i></p><p>I think that you'll find that a large chunk of the <b>profits</b> go to Americans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I keep telling people that these " American Companies " are n't American at all .
Fewer and fewer of their worker 's are American , their ideals are not American and their tax revenue is n't reported in America.I think that you 'll find that a large chunk of the profits go to Americans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I keep telling people that these "American Companies" aren't American at all.
Fewer and fewer of their worker's are American, their ideals are not American and their tax revenue isn't reported in America.I think that you'll find that a large chunk of the profits go to Americans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30616698</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1262345400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Balkans: Net positive effects</p></div><p>Can you elaborate on what you mean here? In general, U.S. (and, generally, western) involvement in most Balkan conflicts was extremely one-sided. E.g. with Kosovo, it stopped the genocide and expulsion of Albanians by Serbs, but ignored the subsequent genocide and expulsion of Serbs by Albanians. It also glosses over the fact that independent Kosovo became a criminal hub (and, it seems, a terrorist boot camp in the making) of Europe.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Balkans : Net positive effectsCan you elaborate on what you mean here ?
In general , U.S. ( and , generally , western ) involvement in most Balkan conflicts was extremely one-sided .
E.g. with Kosovo , it stopped the genocide and expulsion of Albanians by Serbs , but ignored the subsequent genocide and expulsion of Serbs by Albanians .
It also glosses over the fact that independent Kosovo became a criminal hub ( and , it seems , a terrorist boot camp in the making ) of Europe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Balkans: Net positive effectsCan you elaborate on what you mean here?
In general, U.S. (and, generally, western) involvement in most Balkan conflicts was extremely one-sided.
E.g. with Kosovo, it stopped the genocide and expulsion of Albanians by Serbs, but ignored the subsequent genocide and expulsion of Serbs by Albanians.
It also glosses over the fact that independent Kosovo became a criminal hub (and, it seems, a terrorist boot camp in the making) of Europe.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613044</id>
	<title>HAHA DUMBASS!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262341440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is all!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is all!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612782</id>
	<title>lol first post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1293825420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ha!  snagged it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ha !
snagged it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ha!
snagged it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613572</id>
	<title>Money Takes Precident</title>
	<author>Osinoche</author>
	<datestamp>1262354640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't stir with other folks money.
Politics, speech , and all of that don't matter when you're dealing with money.
Rather money than speech.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't stir with other folks money .
Politics , speech , and all of that do n't matter when you 're dealing with money .
Rather money than speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't stir with other folks money.
Politics, speech , and all of that don't matter when you're dealing with money.
Rather money than speech.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615638</id>
	<title>Re:You're right. Law should be followed all the ti</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262378400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ummm, NO.  Rosa Parks was a citizen of the US.  She was defying the injustice her OWN country was doing against her.  An injustice which was shared by a significant percent of the US, AND actually deemed so by the core laws of the nation.  Plus, she was HUMAN.</p><p>If she was Chinese, if they had a similar rule, and she did that; I am sure she would be in jail, and more importantly, few would give a rat's ass.  Because they have different core laws, values, and ethics from us.  As to which is better is a pointless discussion for another time.</p><p>But, in this case, Apple is a business.  They made a business decision.  It would cost them a lot less to comply with the local laws than to fund a lobbying, rebel, or bribery efforts to change them.  Plus, those who want the app, have the will to find ways to get them, and those who don't, can keep feeling like they aren't missing out.  A win, win.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm , NO .
Rosa Parks was a citizen of the US .
She was defying the injustice her OWN country was doing against her .
An injustice which was shared by a significant percent of the US , AND actually deemed so by the core laws of the nation .
Plus , she was HUMAN.If she was Chinese , if they had a similar rule , and she did that ; I am sure she would be in jail , and more importantly , few would give a rat 's ass .
Because they have different core laws , values , and ethics from us .
As to which is better is a pointless discussion for another time.But , in this case , Apple is a business .
They made a business decision .
It would cost them a lot less to comply with the local laws than to fund a lobbying , rebel , or bribery efforts to change them .
Plus , those who want the app , have the will to find ways to get them , and those who do n't , can keep feeling like they are n't missing out .
A win , win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm, NO.
Rosa Parks was a citizen of the US.
She was defying the injustice her OWN country was doing against her.
An injustice which was shared by a significant percent of the US, AND actually deemed so by the core laws of the nation.
Plus, she was HUMAN.If she was Chinese, if they had a similar rule, and she did that; I am sure she would be in jail, and more importantly, few would give a rat's ass.
Because they have different core laws, values, and ethics from us.
As to which is better is a pointless discussion for another time.But, in this case, Apple is a business.
They made a business decision.
It would cost them a lot less to comply with the local laws than to fund a lobbying, rebel, or bribery efforts to change them.
Plus, those who want the app, have the will to find ways to get them, and those who don't, can keep feeling like they aren't missing out.
A win, win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613058</id>
	<title>Re:Not just China..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262341680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But that capitalism at work. money piles build up and its owner get to dictate the market.<br>In china it evil comunist that dictact the market. THIS IS AWFUL, THE WORLD IS ENDING.<br>THE YELLOW PERIL IS COMMING. ERM I MEAN THE COMMIE ARE COMMING. ERM THE...<br>THE UN-AMERICAIN ARE COMMING. OMG! OMG! OMG!</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow\_Peril - But mostly to pass the all cap filter...<br>Yellow Peril (sometimes Yellow Terror) was a color metaphor for race that originated in the late nineteenth century with immigration of Chinese laborers to various Western countries, notably the United States, and later associated with the Japanese during the mid 20th century, due to Japanese military expansion. The term refers to the skin color of East Asians, and the belief that the mass immigration of Asians threatened white wages and standards of living.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But that capitalism at work .
money piles build up and its owner get to dictate the market.In china it evil comunist that dictact the market .
THIS IS AWFUL , THE WORLD IS ENDING.THE YELLOW PERIL IS COMMING .
ERM I MEAN THE COMMIE ARE COMMING .
ERM THE...THE UN-AMERICAIN ARE COMMING .
OMG ! OMG !
OMG ! http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow \ _Peril - But mostly to pass the all cap filter...Yellow Peril ( sometimes Yellow Terror ) was a color metaphor for race that originated in the late nineteenth century with immigration of Chinese laborers to various Western countries , notably the United States , and later associated with the Japanese during the mid 20th century , due to Japanese military expansion .
The term refers to the skin color of East Asians , and the belief that the mass immigration of Asians threatened white wages and standards of living .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But that capitalism at work.
money piles build up and its owner get to dictate the market.In china it evil comunist that dictact the market.
THIS IS AWFUL, THE WORLD IS ENDING.THE YELLOW PERIL IS COMMING.
ERM I MEAN THE COMMIE ARE COMMING.
ERM THE...THE UN-AMERICAIN ARE COMMING.
OMG! OMG!
OMG!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow\_Peril - But mostly to pass the all cap filter...Yellow Peril (sometimes Yellow Terror) was a color metaphor for race that originated in the late nineteenth century with immigration of Chinese laborers to various Western countries, notably the United States, and later associated with the Japanese during the mid 20th century, due to Japanese military expansion.
The term refers to the skin color of East Asians, and the belief that the mass immigration of Asians threatened white wages and standards of living.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614154</id>
	<title>Re:Oh FFS Slashdot</title>
	<author>lee1</author>
	<datestamp>1262362560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the case of Google ('don't be evil'), the situation is <a href="http://lee-phillips.org/youtube/" title="lee-phillips.org">more complex</a> [lee-phillips.org].
For example, they
have agreed to remove content from YouTube to satisfy the demands of the Pakistani government, who objected to videos that were critical of Islam.
Google applies this censorship within the U.S., where no law requires it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the case of Google ( 'do n't be evil ' ) , the situation is more complex [ lee-phillips.org ] .
For example , they have agreed to remove content from YouTube to satisfy the demands of the Pakistani government , who objected to videos that were critical of Islam .
Google applies this censorship within the U.S. , where no law requires it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the case of Google ('don't be evil'), the situation is more complex [lee-phillips.org].
For example, they
have agreed to remove content from YouTube to satisfy the demands of the Pakistani government, who objected to videos that were critical of Islam.
Google applies this censorship within the U.S., where no law requires it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614780</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262369220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And China is now supporting dictatorships/totalitarians around the world, as well as building up a military surrounding India. How soon before they invade them? They did it in 1962. Even now, China is getting ready to take water from India and Bangladesh.<br> <br>While I will not defend America's invasion/occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan was supporting AQ, and had to be invaded.  Even China supported that. Later, there was overwhelming evidence that China was offering covert aid to Al Qaeda. That is until recently, when Al Qaeda objected to China's action in Western China. Now, China simply executes a number of citizens in western China just for suspicion of being associated with Al Qaeda.<br> <br>
Dude, before throwing rocks at America, look at yourselves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And China is now supporting dictatorships/totalitarians around the world , as well as building up a military surrounding India .
How soon before they invade them ?
They did it in 1962 .
Even now , China is getting ready to take water from India and Bangladesh .
While I will not defend America 's invasion/occupation of Iraq , Afghanistan was supporting AQ , and had to be invaded .
Even China supported that .
Later , there was overwhelming evidence that China was offering covert aid to Al Qaeda .
That is until recently , when Al Qaeda objected to China 's action in Western China .
Now , China simply executes a number of citizens in western China just for suspicion of being associated with Al Qaeda .
Dude , before throwing rocks at America , look at yourselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And China is now supporting dictatorships/totalitarians around the world, as well as building up a military surrounding India.
How soon before they invade them?
They did it in 1962.
Even now, China is getting ready to take water from India and Bangladesh.
While I will not defend America's invasion/occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan was supporting AQ, and had to be invaded.
Even China supported that.
Later, there was overwhelming evidence that China was offering covert aid to Al Qaeda.
That is until recently, when Al Qaeda objected to China's action in Western China.
Now, China simply executes a number of citizens in western China just for suspicion of being associated with Al Qaeda.
Dude, before throwing rocks at America, look at yourselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30618896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30619710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30616698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30617412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_01_0319211_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614572
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30617412
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615016
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30619710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613322
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614210
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30618896
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30616698
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614166
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615638
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613058
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612960
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613170
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30615660
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30612866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30614110
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_01_0319211.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_01_0319211.30613456
</commentlist>
</conversation>
