<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_15_2041202</id>
	<title>Why Counter-Terrorism Is In Shambles</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1263556380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Early last week several questions were submitted to former CIA analyst Ray McGovern about the <a href="http://consortiumnews.com/2010/010510c.html">sad state of counter-terrorism in the United States</a>, and he has answered frankly and in-depth.  In addition, McGovern solicited former FBI attorney/special agent Coleen Rowley to review his answers and provide her own comments.  Ray's biggest tip to the intelligence community was to <i>"HOLD ACCOUNTABLE THOSE RESPONSIBLE. More 'reform' is the last thing we need. Sorry, but we DO have to look back.  The most effective step would be to release the CIA Inspector General report on intelligence community performance prior to 9/11. That investigation was run by, and its report was prepared by an honest man, it turns out.  It was immediately suppressed by then-Acting DCI John McLaughlin &mdash; another Tenet clone &mdash; and McLaughin's successors as director, Porter Goss, Michael Hayden, and now Leon Panetta."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Early last week several questions were submitted to former CIA analyst Ray McGovern about the sad state of counter-terrorism in the United States , and he has answered frankly and in-depth .
In addition , McGovern solicited former FBI attorney/special agent Coleen Rowley to review his answers and provide her own comments .
Ray 's biggest tip to the intelligence community was to " HOLD ACCOUNTABLE THOSE RESPONSIBLE .
More 'reform ' is the last thing we need .
Sorry , but we DO have to look back .
The most effective step would be to release the CIA Inspector General report on intelligence community performance prior to 9/11 .
That investigation was run by , and its report was prepared by an honest man , it turns out .
It was immediately suppressed by then-Acting DCI John McLaughlin    another Tenet clone    and McLaughin 's successors as director , Porter Goss , Michael Hayden , and now Leon Panetta .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Early last week several questions were submitted to former CIA analyst Ray McGovern about the sad state of counter-terrorism in the United States, and he has answered frankly and in-depth.
In addition, McGovern solicited former FBI attorney/special agent Coleen Rowley to review his answers and provide her own comments.
Ray's biggest tip to the intelligence community was to "HOLD ACCOUNTABLE THOSE RESPONSIBLE.
More 'reform' is the last thing we need.
Sorry, but we DO have to look back.
The most effective step would be to release the CIA Inspector General report on intelligence community performance prior to 9/11.
That investigation was run by, and its report was prepared by an honest man, it turns out.
It was immediately suppressed by then-Acting DCI John McLaughlin — another Tenet clone — and McLaughin's successors as director, Porter Goss, Michael Hayden, and now Leon Panetta.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263562140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lets take a look at why Al Qaeda attacked the United States on 9/11. Now, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's minister, would say its because Americas needed to come home and roost. Or you could go with that retard professor and say its because US foreign agrression. OR, you could, if you wanted to, but you dont have to (and most certainly wont because it would just be too easy to do), go with the reasoning of Osama Bin laden.</p><p>See, Bin Laden didnt like the United States having military forces in Saudi Arabia (known as the Kingdom, considered by many muslims as "holy ground"). However, the United States was INVITED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF SAUDI ARABIA to station its forces on its soil, to help protect it from a military mad man known as Sadam Hussien (and Iran to some extent). Bin Laden and his goons demanded that the US leave, but the SAUDI GOVERNMENT WANTED US TO STAY. So what do you do? Do you concede to the lunatic fringe (aka: terrorists) like Bin Laden, or do you do whats best for your national interest as invited guests?</p><p>But this is difficult for lefties to get. You cant just do what everyone wants you to do because they will threaten you if you dont. Sometimes you have to just fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing (or one has to submit).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets take a look at why Al Qaeda attacked the United States on 9/11 .
Now , Rev .
Jeremiah Wright , Obama 's minister , would say its because Americas needed to come home and roost .
Or you could go with that retard professor and say its because US foreign agrression .
OR , you could , if you wanted to , but you dont have to ( and most certainly wont because it would just be too easy to do ) , go with the reasoning of Osama Bin laden.See , Bin Laden didnt like the United States having military forces in Saudi Arabia ( known as the Kingdom , considered by many muslims as " holy ground " ) .
However , the United States was INVITED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF SAUDI ARABIA to station its forces on its soil , to help protect it from a military mad man known as Sadam Hussien ( and Iran to some extent ) .
Bin Laden and his goons demanded that the US leave , but the SAUDI GOVERNMENT WANTED US TO STAY .
So what do you do ?
Do you concede to the lunatic fringe ( aka : terrorists ) like Bin Laden , or do you do whats best for your national interest as invited guests ? But this is difficult for lefties to get .
You cant just do what everyone wants you to do because they will threaten you if you dont .
Sometimes you have to just fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing ( or one has to submit ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets take a look at why Al Qaeda attacked the United States on 9/11.
Now, Rev.
Jeremiah Wright, Obama's minister, would say its because Americas needed to come home and roost.
Or you could go with that retard professor and say its because US foreign agrression.
OR, you could, if you wanted to, but you dont have to (and most certainly wont because it would just be too easy to do), go with the reasoning of Osama Bin laden.See, Bin Laden didnt like the United States having military forces in Saudi Arabia (known as the Kingdom, considered by many muslims as "holy ground").
However, the United States was INVITED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF SAUDI ARABIA to station its forces on its soil, to help protect it from a military mad man known as Sadam Hussien (and Iran to some extent).
Bin Laden and his goons demanded that the US leave, but the SAUDI GOVERNMENT WANTED US TO STAY.
So what do you do?
Do you concede to the lunatic fringe (aka: terrorists) like Bin Laden, or do you do whats best for your national interest as invited guests?But this is difficult for lefties to get.
You cant just do what everyone wants you to do because they will threaten you if you dont.
Sometimes you have to just fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing (or one has to submit).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786692</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>Torodung</author>
	<datestamp>1263565980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm. Seems to me that some mods are modding "disagree." I don't see how this is a "troll" at all.</p><p>That said, shortly after Obama was inaugurated, Interpol <a href="http://www.interpol.int/public/icpo/pressreleases/pr2009/PR200928.asp" title="interpol.int">listed 81 international terrorists</a> [interpol.int] with intent to attack Saudi Arabia. Seems like the greatest reason we were being attacked may be because the Bush family was friends with the Saudi royal family, and we were very, very loyal about protecting them, even to the threat of our homeland.</p><p>It also tells me that we make an easier, more productive target than the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn\_Saud\_of\_Saudi\_Arabia" title="wikipedia.org">House of Ibn Saud</a> [wikipedia.org]. The best answer to the question of why we get targeted is the simple one. We're more <b>convenient</b>, and we don't live in a fortress. That and the President of the United States actually cares and looks bad when his people suffer, a curse the King of Saudi Arabia doesn't seem to have to live with.</p><p>So I would be very careful about making assumptions about who claims to be our friend and the invitations they send us. We're being used. This is exactly the kind of personal, family legacy war Kings would get into before we abolished them here in the U.S. because we were sick of all the stupid pointless warring.</p><p>All that needs to be done is to point the bastards at their proper target, and let the chickens come to roost at the House of Ibn Saud, so we don't have to tend his bitter flock. After we get ourselves off oil dependency first, of course.</p><p>I don't think left and right matter here. I think we just need to find a way forward that doesn't necessitate we become an authoritarian police state fighting an endless war like Oceania in 1984.</p><p>--<br>Toro</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm .
Seems to me that some mods are modding " disagree .
" I do n't see how this is a " troll " at all.That said , shortly after Obama was inaugurated , Interpol listed 81 international terrorists [ interpol.int ] with intent to attack Saudi Arabia .
Seems like the greatest reason we were being attacked may be because the Bush family was friends with the Saudi royal family , and we were very , very loyal about protecting them , even to the threat of our homeland.It also tells me that we make an easier , more productive target than the House of Ibn Saud [ wikipedia.org ] .
The best answer to the question of why we get targeted is the simple one .
We 're more convenient , and we do n't live in a fortress .
That and the President of the United States actually cares and looks bad when his people suffer , a curse the King of Saudi Arabia does n't seem to have to live with.So I would be very careful about making assumptions about who claims to be our friend and the invitations they send us .
We 're being used .
This is exactly the kind of personal , family legacy war Kings would get into before we abolished them here in the U.S. because we were sick of all the stupid pointless warring.All that needs to be done is to point the bastards at their proper target , and let the chickens come to roost at the House of Ibn Saud , so we do n't have to tend his bitter flock .
After we get ourselves off oil dependency first , of course.I do n't think left and right matter here .
I think we just need to find a way forward that does n't necessitate we become an authoritarian police state fighting an endless war like Oceania in 1984.--Toro</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm.
Seems to me that some mods are modding "disagree.
" I don't see how this is a "troll" at all.That said, shortly after Obama was inaugurated, Interpol listed 81 international terrorists [interpol.int] with intent to attack Saudi Arabia.
Seems like the greatest reason we were being attacked may be because the Bush family was friends with the Saudi royal family, and we were very, very loyal about protecting them, even to the threat of our homeland.It also tells me that we make an easier, more productive target than the House of Ibn Saud [wikipedia.org].
The best answer to the question of why we get targeted is the simple one.
We're more convenient, and we don't live in a fortress.
That and the President of the United States actually cares and looks bad when his people suffer, a curse the King of Saudi Arabia doesn't seem to have to live with.So I would be very careful about making assumptions about who claims to be our friend and the invitations they send us.
We're being used.
This is exactly the kind of personal, family legacy war Kings would get into before we abolished them here in the U.S. because we were sick of all the stupid pointless warring.All that needs to be done is to point the bastards at their proper target, and let the chickens come to roost at the House of Ibn Saud, so we don't have to tend his bitter flock.
After we get ourselves off oil dependency first, of course.I don't think left and right matter here.
I think we just need to find a way forward that doesn't necessitate we become an authoritarian police state fighting an endless war like Oceania in 1984.--Toro</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</id>
	<title>Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>GNUALMAFUERTE</author>
	<datestamp>1263563820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The so called acts of "terrorism" against the USA, could be called by another name. They are the resistance. The United States is an empire. it's ok, it's not a bad thing in itself. Embrace what you are. So, there is a resistance. A small, stupid, disorganized, and full of religious fanatics resistance. The fact that the resistance isn't bigger doesn't mean there are not a lot of other people that would like to resist, they just don't think blowing up buildings is the way to resist the empire.</p><p>So, when you say "Anti-terrorism" you actually mean "Anti enemies of the empire". What the government is doing is chasing the enemies of the empire. It is doing so using the worth methodologies: fear, violence, persecution, surveillance. And what the US is accomplishing is far from stopping that resistance: It actually gets more people to join  in, and causes even more hate against your country.</p><p>The UK was once a Huge Empire, and they conquered most of the known world. And nobody hated them as much as everyone hates the US. And many times, what they did was actually far worse than the actions of the US. Then, why is the US hated so much? two reasons: One, people don't like self-righteous fucks. Do what you must, but don't pretend to be the land of the free and home of the whatever anymore. You are an empire. Conquer and STFU. Stop trying to sell the "American" way to everyone. Second: Conquer, but don't destroy. The UK conquered half the world, and now those places are known as Australia, The United States, Canada<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before. They are actually worse now after you screwed them up. Want their oil? Conquer them, get their oil, and in the process establish there and build trains and schools. The Colony model works, the big country takes the resources and cheap work that they need, and the small startup country grows and learns. Eventually, it becomes independent.</p><p>But if you keep conquering, screwing the place up, and then leaving, with the sole goal of selling more weapons and controlling the price of oil, people will hate you mroe and more, and they'll continue trying to blow the fuck out of your country.</p><p>Being a self righteous fuck and saying "why does the world hate us" doesn't help. Realizing what you are, and acting in consequence does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The so called acts of " terrorism " against the USA , could be called by another name .
They are the resistance .
The United States is an empire .
it 's ok , it 's not a bad thing in itself .
Embrace what you are .
So , there is a resistance .
A small , stupid , disorganized , and full of religious fanatics resistance .
The fact that the resistance is n't bigger does n't mean there are not a lot of other people that would like to resist , they just do n't think blowing up buildings is the way to resist the empire.So , when you say " Anti-terrorism " you actually mean " Anti enemies of the empire " .
What the government is doing is chasing the enemies of the empire .
It is doing so using the worth methodologies : fear , violence , persecution , surveillance .
And what the US is accomplishing is far from stopping that resistance : It actually gets more people to join in , and causes even more hate against your country.The UK was once a Huge Empire , and they conquered most of the known world .
And nobody hated them as much as everyone hates the US .
And many times , what they did was actually far worse than the actions of the US .
Then , why is the US hated so much ?
two reasons : One , people do n't like self-righteous fucks .
Do what you must , but do n't pretend to be the land of the free and home of the whatever anymore .
You are an empire .
Conquer and STFU .
Stop trying to sell the " American " way to everyone .
Second : Conquer , but do n't destroy .
The UK conquered half the world , and now those places are known as Australia , The United States , Canada ... The US , OTOH , conquered Iran , Afghanistan , Vietnam , and those places are the same shitholes they were before .
They are actually worse now after you screwed them up .
Want their oil ?
Conquer them , get their oil , and in the process establish there and build trains and schools .
The Colony model works , the big country takes the resources and cheap work that they need , and the small startup country grows and learns .
Eventually , it becomes independent.But if you keep conquering , screwing the place up , and then leaving , with the sole goal of selling more weapons and controlling the price of oil , people will hate you mroe and more , and they 'll continue trying to blow the fuck out of your country.Being a self righteous fuck and saying " why does the world hate us " does n't help .
Realizing what you are , and acting in consequence does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The so called acts of "terrorism" against the USA, could be called by another name.
They are the resistance.
The United States is an empire.
it's ok, it's not a bad thing in itself.
Embrace what you are.
So, there is a resistance.
A small, stupid, disorganized, and full of religious fanatics resistance.
The fact that the resistance isn't bigger doesn't mean there are not a lot of other people that would like to resist, they just don't think blowing up buildings is the way to resist the empire.So, when you say "Anti-terrorism" you actually mean "Anti enemies of the empire".
What the government is doing is chasing the enemies of the empire.
It is doing so using the worth methodologies: fear, violence, persecution, surveillance.
And what the US is accomplishing is far from stopping that resistance: It actually gets more people to join  in, and causes even more hate against your country.The UK was once a Huge Empire, and they conquered most of the known world.
And nobody hated them as much as everyone hates the US.
And many times, what they did was actually far worse than the actions of the US.
Then, why is the US hated so much?
two reasons: One, people don't like self-righteous fucks.
Do what you must, but don't pretend to be the land of the free and home of the whatever anymore.
You are an empire.
Conquer and STFU.
Stop trying to sell the "American" way to everyone.
Second: Conquer, but don't destroy.
The UK conquered half the world, and now those places are known as Australia, The United States, Canada ... The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before.
They are actually worse now after you screwed them up.
Want their oil?
Conquer them, get their oil, and in the process establish there and build trains and schools.
The Colony model works, the big country takes the resources and cheap work that they need, and the small startup country grows and learns.
Eventually, it becomes independent.But if you keep conquering, screwing the place up, and then leaving, with the sole goal of selling more weapons and controlling the price of oil, people will hate you mroe and more, and they'll continue trying to blow the fuck out of your country.Being a self righteous fuck and saying "why does the world hate us" doesn't help.
Realizing what you are, and acting in consequence does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789176</id>
	<title>USA not an empire but has client states?</title>
	<author>fantomas</author>
	<datestamp>1263643080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You say the USA is not an empire but Israel is a client state of the USA? It seems to me that empires still do exist but the forms of power are a little more subtle than in the Roman or British Empire. People are not excluded from positions of power if they are not Roman citizens - though it could be argued that you'd be marginalised from positions of power if you don't speak English in 'client states'. The British flag is not run up flag poles right across the Empire - though there are preferential trading agreements and even pricing for 'client states' and promises of economic and other support.</p><p>I think geopolitics still exists but it has become a little more subtle. To be fair of course this doesn't just refer to the USA but many other countries. It strikes me that aid money - long term, not disaster support, can be used as a means of establishing and maintaining influence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You say the USA is not an empire but Israel is a client state of the USA ?
It seems to me that empires still do exist but the forms of power are a little more subtle than in the Roman or British Empire .
People are not excluded from positions of power if they are not Roman citizens - though it could be argued that you 'd be marginalised from positions of power if you do n't speak English in 'client states' .
The British flag is not run up flag poles right across the Empire - though there are preferential trading agreements and even pricing for 'client states ' and promises of economic and other support.I think geopolitics still exists but it has become a little more subtle .
To be fair of course this does n't just refer to the USA but many other countries .
It strikes me that aid money - long term , not disaster support , can be used as a means of establishing and maintaining influence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say the USA is not an empire but Israel is a client state of the USA?
It seems to me that empires still do exist but the forms of power are a little more subtle than in the Roman or British Empire.
People are not excluded from positions of power if they are not Roman citizens - though it could be argued that you'd be marginalised from positions of power if you don't speak English in 'client states'.
The British flag is not run up flag poles right across the Empire - though there are preferential trading agreements and even pricing for 'client states' and promises of economic and other support.I think geopolitics still exists but it has become a little more subtle.
To be fair of course this doesn't just refer to the USA but many other countries.
It strikes me that aid money - long term, not disaster support, can be used as a means of establishing and maintaining influence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788378</id>
	<title>Proactol Review</title>
	<author>stuartry</author>
	<datestamp>1263584880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You could look into rangers. Someone I met recently was obsessed about these guys and was intending to join. They tend to take missions involved with sniping and are extremely cautious.
<a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/proactol-review-does-proactol-diet-pills-work-for-weight-loss-1707237.html" title="articlesbase.com" rel="nofollow">Proactol Review</a> [articlesbase.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could look into rangers .
Someone I met recently was obsessed about these guys and was intending to join .
They tend to take missions involved with sniping and are extremely cautious .
Proactol Review [ articlesbase.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could look into rangers.
Someone I met recently was obsessed about these guys and was intending to join.
They tend to take missions involved with sniping and are extremely cautious.
Proactol Review [articlesbase.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786970</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>genner</author>
	<datestamp>1263568080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The so called acts of "terrorism" against the USA, could be called by another name. They are the resistance. The United States is an empire. it's ok, it's not a bad thing in itself. Embrace what you are. So, there is a resistance. A small, stupid, disorganized, and full of religious fanatics resistance. The fact that the resistance isn't bigger doesn't mean there are not a lot of other people that would like to resist, they just don't think blowing up buildings is the way to resist the empire.</p><p>So, when you say "Anti-terrorism" you actually mean "Anti enemies of the empire". What the government is doing is chasing the enemies of the empire. It is doing so using the worth methodologies: fear, violence, persecution, surveillance. And what the US is accomplishing is far from stopping that resistance: It actually gets more people to join  in, and causes even more hate against your country.</p><p>The UK was once a Huge Empire, and they conquered most of the known world. And nobody hated them as much as everyone hates the US. And many times, what they did was actually far worse than the actions of the US. Then, why is the US hated so much? two reasons: One, people don't like self-righteous fucks. Do what you must, but don't pretend to be the land of the free and home of the whatever anymore. You are an empire. Conquer and STFU. Stop trying to sell the "American" way to everyone. Second: Conquer, but don't destroy. The UK conquered half the world, and now those places are known as Australia, The United States, Canada<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before. They are actually worse now after you screwed them up. Want their oil? Conquer them, get their oil, and in the process establish there and build trains and schools. The Colony model works, the big country takes the resources and cheap work that they need, and the small startup country grows and learns. Eventually, it becomes independent.</p><p>But if you keep conquering, screwing the place up, and then leaving, with the sole goal of selling more weapons and controlling the price of oil, people will hate you mroe and more, and they'll continue trying to blow the fuck out of your country.</p><p>Being a self righteous fuck and saying "why does the world hate us" doesn't help. Realizing what you are, and acting in consequence does.</p></div><p>So what we remove the Iraqi government and declare it the 51st state? <br>
I sincerily doubt we will be hated less by doing that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The so called acts of " terrorism " against the USA , could be called by another name .
They are the resistance .
The United States is an empire .
it 's ok , it 's not a bad thing in itself .
Embrace what you are .
So , there is a resistance .
A small , stupid , disorganized , and full of religious fanatics resistance .
The fact that the resistance is n't bigger does n't mean there are not a lot of other people that would like to resist , they just do n't think blowing up buildings is the way to resist the empire.So , when you say " Anti-terrorism " you actually mean " Anti enemies of the empire " .
What the government is doing is chasing the enemies of the empire .
It is doing so using the worth methodologies : fear , violence , persecution , surveillance .
And what the US is accomplishing is far from stopping that resistance : It actually gets more people to join in , and causes even more hate against your country.The UK was once a Huge Empire , and they conquered most of the known world .
And nobody hated them as much as everyone hates the US .
And many times , what they did was actually far worse than the actions of the US .
Then , why is the US hated so much ?
two reasons : One , people do n't like self-righteous fucks .
Do what you must , but do n't pretend to be the land of the free and home of the whatever anymore .
You are an empire .
Conquer and STFU .
Stop trying to sell the " American " way to everyone .
Second : Conquer , but do n't destroy .
The UK conquered half the world , and now those places are known as Australia , The United States , Canada ... The US , OTOH , conquered Iran , Afghanistan , Vietnam , and those places are the same shitholes they were before .
They are actually worse now after you screwed them up .
Want their oil ?
Conquer them , get their oil , and in the process establish there and build trains and schools .
The Colony model works , the big country takes the resources and cheap work that they need , and the small startup country grows and learns .
Eventually , it becomes independent.But if you keep conquering , screwing the place up , and then leaving , with the sole goal of selling more weapons and controlling the price of oil , people will hate you mroe and more , and they 'll continue trying to blow the fuck out of your country.Being a self righteous fuck and saying " why does the world hate us " does n't help .
Realizing what you are , and acting in consequence does.So what we remove the Iraqi government and declare it the 51st state ?
I sincerily doubt we will be hated less by doing that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The so called acts of "terrorism" against the USA, could be called by another name.
They are the resistance.
The United States is an empire.
it's ok, it's not a bad thing in itself.
Embrace what you are.
So, there is a resistance.
A small, stupid, disorganized, and full of religious fanatics resistance.
The fact that the resistance isn't bigger doesn't mean there are not a lot of other people that would like to resist, they just don't think blowing up buildings is the way to resist the empire.So, when you say "Anti-terrorism" you actually mean "Anti enemies of the empire".
What the government is doing is chasing the enemies of the empire.
It is doing so using the worth methodologies: fear, violence, persecution, surveillance.
And what the US is accomplishing is far from stopping that resistance: It actually gets more people to join  in, and causes even more hate against your country.The UK was once a Huge Empire, and they conquered most of the known world.
And nobody hated them as much as everyone hates the US.
And many times, what they did was actually far worse than the actions of the US.
Then, why is the US hated so much?
two reasons: One, people don't like self-righteous fucks.
Do what you must, but don't pretend to be the land of the free and home of the whatever anymore.
You are an empire.
Conquer and STFU.
Stop trying to sell the "American" way to everyone.
Second: Conquer, but don't destroy.
The UK conquered half the world, and now those places are known as Australia, The United States, Canada ... The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before.
They are actually worse now after you screwed them up.
Want their oil?
Conquer them, get their oil, and in the process establish there and build trains and schools.
The Colony model works, the big country takes the resources and cheap work that they need, and the small startup country grows and learns.
Eventually, it becomes independent.But if you keep conquering, screwing the place up, and then leaving, with the sole goal of selling more weapons and controlling the price of oil, people will hate you mroe and more, and they'll continue trying to blow the fuck out of your country.Being a self righteous fuck and saying "why does the world hate us" doesn't help.
Realizing what you are, and acting in consequence does.So what we remove the Iraqi government and declare it the 51st state?
I sincerily doubt we will be hated less by doing that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788678</id>
	<title>honesty</title>
	<author>10am-bedtime</author>
	<datestamp>1263634680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... is such a lonely word.<br>everyone is so untrue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... is such a lonely word.everyone is so untrue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is such a lonely word.everyone is so untrue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787142</id>
	<title>Re:agree with the spirit, but some of the details.</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1263569880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>as half-baked: "Add Washington's propping up of dictatorial, repressive regimes in order to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas</p></div></blockquote><p>He's talking about Saudi Arabia so it's not really half-baked.<br>The Iraq war had a lot of reasons, most of which are stupid and to the detriment of the USA even if they help individuals and a few corporations, and to this point it's failed at the sensible one (site for US base which he refers to later).  I'm surprised that leading retired military figures think that Iraq will eventually settle down like post-war Japan but that Afganistan is a basket case because the press is generally reporting things the other way.  I think we should listen to the experts like McGovern.<br>As for the bit about causes, it makes it a lot easier to identify potential terrorists if nothing else.  It doesn't mean it has to be fixed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>as half-baked : " Add Washington 's propping up of dictatorial , repressive regimes in order to secure continuing access to oil and natural gasHe 's talking about Saudi Arabia so it 's not really half-baked.The Iraq war had a lot of reasons , most of which are stupid and to the detriment of the USA even if they help individuals and a few corporations , and to this point it 's failed at the sensible one ( site for US base which he refers to later ) .
I 'm surprised that leading retired military figures think that Iraq will eventually settle down like post-war Japan but that Afganistan is a basket case because the press is generally reporting things the other way .
I think we should listen to the experts like McGovern.As for the bit about causes , it makes it a lot easier to identify potential terrorists if nothing else .
It does n't mean it has to be fixed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as half-baked: "Add Washington's propping up of dictatorial, repressive regimes in order to secure continuing access to oil and natural gasHe's talking about Saudi Arabia so it's not really half-baked.The Iraq war had a lot of reasons, most of which are stupid and to the detriment of the USA even if they help individuals and a few corporations, and to this point it's failed at the sensible one (site for US base which he refers to later).
I'm surprised that leading retired military figures think that Iraq will eventually settle down like post-war Japan but that Afganistan is a basket case because the press is generally reporting things the other way.
I think we should listen to the experts like McGovern.As for the bit about causes, it makes it a lot easier to identify potential terrorists if nothing else.
It doesn't mean it has to be fixed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789954</id>
	<title>Nobody hates the english?</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1263653400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ooh. Go to Scotland and say it is your favorite part of england. Hope you can run fast. Then do it in the wrong parts of northern Ireland.
</p><p>Many Indians (the sub continent, not the race the USA practically wiped out) fought WITH the nazi's to dismantle the British empire. The palestines worked together with the nazi's as well, again to get the British out (and this is one of the reasons britain has had such a dubious role in the entire conflict, basically both Israelis and Palestinians fought them).
</p><p>Now the british empire or commonwealth is not all overrun by hate, but neither is the US "empire". Why do you think the US does so well with its movies? Because people around the world love them. If the US was truly so hated, McDonalds etc would not be able to sell their products world-wide.
</p><p>And of course, your logic fails to account for terrorist attacks in other parts of the world. Why all the attacks in Iraq against muslims? Why does Morocco have a fence? Why is India attacked by terrorists from Pakistan?
</p><p>No, you got pet peeve with the US, fine but it is clouding your vision. The enemy of my enemy is not your friend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ooh .
Go to Scotland and say it is your favorite part of england .
Hope you can run fast .
Then do it in the wrong parts of northern Ireland .
Many Indians ( the sub continent , not the race the USA practically wiped out ) fought WITH the nazi 's to dismantle the British empire .
The palestines worked together with the nazi 's as well , again to get the British out ( and this is one of the reasons britain has had such a dubious role in the entire conflict , basically both Israelis and Palestinians fought them ) .
Now the british empire or commonwealth is not all overrun by hate , but neither is the US " empire " .
Why do you think the US does so well with its movies ?
Because people around the world love them .
If the US was truly so hated , McDonalds etc would not be able to sell their products world-wide .
And of course , your logic fails to account for terrorist attacks in other parts of the world .
Why all the attacks in Iraq against muslims ?
Why does Morocco have a fence ?
Why is India attacked by terrorists from Pakistan ?
No , you got pet peeve with the US , fine but it is clouding your vision .
The enemy of my enemy is not your friend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ooh.
Go to Scotland and say it is your favorite part of england.
Hope you can run fast.
Then do it in the wrong parts of northern Ireland.
Many Indians (the sub continent, not the race the USA practically wiped out) fought WITH the nazi's to dismantle the British empire.
The palestines worked together with the nazi's as well, again to get the British out (and this is one of the reasons britain has had such a dubious role in the entire conflict, basically both Israelis and Palestinians fought them).
Now the british empire or commonwealth is not all overrun by hate, but neither is the US "empire".
Why do you think the US does so well with its movies?
Because people around the world love them.
If the US was truly so hated, McDonalds etc would not be able to sell their products world-wide.
And of course, your logic fails to account for terrorist attacks in other parts of the world.
Why all the attacks in Iraq against muslims?
Why does Morocco have a fence?
Why is India attacked by terrorists from Pakistan?
No, you got pet peeve with the US, fine but it is clouding your vision.
The enemy of my enemy is not your friend.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790596</id>
	<title>Who's responsible? B-U-S-H</title>
	<author>ismism</author>
	<datestamp>1263660060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Village Idiot let 9/11 happen. It's laughably obvious. He earned his place in history right next to Hitler, et al.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Village Idiot let 9/11 happen .
It 's laughably obvious .
He earned his place in history right next to Hitler , et al .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Village Idiot let 9/11 happen.
It's laughably obvious.
He earned his place in history right next to Hitler, et al.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787178</id>
	<title>Re:agree with the spirit, but some of the details.</title>
	<author>lawpoop</author>
	<datestamp>1263570600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But how can McGovern say that "one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan" was "to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas?" ?" This doesn't make any sense. Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003. The invasion devastated oil production. And Afghanistan has never been a big oil producer.</p> </div><p>You're thinking "nation-state" and not "regional".<br> <br>
We are not interested in anybody's particular oil fields -- not Iraq's, not Iran's, etc. What we want to ensure is that there is a free market, which means a free flow, of oil and natural gas, throughout the region. As you may know, there is a big narual gas pipeline being built through Afghanistan, which will connect the Ukraine and other big natural gas fields to the west. We want to make sure that no President Hussein or President Ahmadinejad can distrup the regional market over there, and that multi-national corporations are free to do their business. And we need military bases so nobody can even think about acting up.

<br> <br>The mafia boss in the neighborhood doesn't want to run anybody's business. They just want to make sure that business is happening, and they're getting the protection money, and nobody else is. Governments and their armies are the goons, and the Corporations are the bosses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But how can McGovern say that " one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan " was " to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas ?
" ?
" This does n't make any sense .
Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003 .
The invasion devastated oil production .
And Afghanistan has never been a big oil producer .
You 're thinking " nation-state " and not " regional " .
We are not interested in anybody 's particular oil fields -- not Iraq 's , not Iran 's , etc .
What we want to ensure is that there is a free market , which means a free flow , of oil and natural gas , throughout the region .
As you may know , there is a big narual gas pipeline being built through Afghanistan , which will connect the Ukraine and other big natural gas fields to the west .
We want to make sure that no President Hussein or President Ahmadinejad can distrup the regional market over there , and that multi-national corporations are free to do their business .
And we need military bases so nobody can even think about acting up .
The mafia boss in the neighborhood does n't want to run anybody 's business .
They just want to make sure that business is happening , and they 're getting the protection money , and nobody else is .
Governments and their armies are the goons , and the Corporations are the bosses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how can McGovern say that "one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan" was "to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas?
" ?
" This doesn't make any sense.
Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003.
The invasion devastated oil production.
And Afghanistan has never been a big oil producer.
You're thinking "nation-state" and not "regional".
We are not interested in anybody's particular oil fields -- not Iraq's, not Iran's, etc.
What we want to ensure is that there is a free market, which means a free flow, of oil and natural gas, throughout the region.
As you may know, there is a big narual gas pipeline being built through Afghanistan, which will connect the Ukraine and other big natural gas fields to the west.
We want to make sure that no President Hussein or President Ahmadinejad can distrup the regional market over there, and that multi-national corporations are free to do their business.
And we need military bases so nobody can even think about acting up.
The mafia boss in the neighborhood doesn't want to run anybody's business.
They just want to make sure that business is happening, and they're getting the protection money, and nobody else is.
Governments and their armies are the goons, and the Corporations are the bosses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786578</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>Phantom of the Opera</author>
	<datestamp>1263565020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You might want to look up Operation Ajax.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might want to look up Operation Ajax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might want to look up Operation Ajax.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787570</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1263574980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The United States is an empire.</p></div><p>I strongly disagree. I think the global system is more a weak hegemony, with occasional dominant influence by the US, but also heavy influence by other big players like the EU, Russia, and China.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before.</p></div><p>Ignoring that the US didn't conquer any of those countries (there's a difference between conquering a country and militarily supporting existing rivals to the current government), we still have other examples that fared better. For example, Japan, Germany, and Italy all are doing quite well these days (asically we can take most of the EU as an example, to be honest). South Korea and Taiwan are thriving countries now due to US military support. Even most invasions (Panama, Grenada) didn't conquer the country in question. Iraq is technically the only US attempt to conquer a country since the invasion of North Korea in 1951 or the activities of the Second World War.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The United States is an empire.I strongly disagree .
I think the global system is more a weak hegemony , with occasional dominant influence by the US , but also heavy influence by other big players like the EU , Russia , and China.The US , OTOH , conquered Iran , Afghanistan , Vietnam , and those places are the same shitholes they were before.Ignoring that the US did n't conquer any of those countries ( there 's a difference between conquering a country and militarily supporting existing rivals to the current government ) , we still have other examples that fared better .
For example , Japan , Germany , and Italy all are doing quite well these days ( asically we can take most of the EU as an example , to be honest ) .
South Korea and Taiwan are thriving countries now due to US military support .
Even most invasions ( Panama , Grenada ) did n't conquer the country in question .
Iraq is technically the only US attempt to conquer a country since the invasion of North Korea in 1951 or the activities of the Second World War .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The United States is an empire.I strongly disagree.
I think the global system is more a weak hegemony, with occasional dominant influence by the US, but also heavy influence by other big players like the EU, Russia, and China.The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before.Ignoring that the US didn't conquer any of those countries (there's a difference between conquering a country and militarily supporting existing rivals to the current government), we still have other examples that fared better.
For example, Japan, Germany, and Italy all are doing quite well these days (asically we can take most of the EU as an example, to be honest).
South Korea and Taiwan are thriving countries now due to US military support.
Even most invasions (Panama, Grenada) didn't conquer the country in question.
Iraq is technically the only US attempt to conquer a country since the invasion of North Korea in 1951 or the activities of the Second World War.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30796094</id>
	<title>The Real Reason...</title>
	<author>fyreous</author>
	<datestamp>1263664140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The real reason that counter-terrorism is in shambles is because we don't actually have Jack Bauer working for us...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real reason that counter-terrorism is in shambles is because we do n't actually have Jack Bauer working for us.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real reason that counter-terrorism is in shambles is because we don't actually have Jack Bauer working for us...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1263560940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 'War on Terror' will prove to be ineffective as the 'War on Drugs'. When you boil it all down, you are pitting human intelligence against human intelligence. Humans are very clever critters and will find one way or another around obstacles. If any progress at all is to be made, you need to fight the disease, not the symptoms. You have to ask "Why are these people doing this in the first place?" and address that as the root problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 'War on Terror ' will prove to be ineffective as the 'War on Drugs' .
When you boil it all down , you are pitting human intelligence against human intelligence .
Humans are very clever critters and will find one way or another around obstacles .
If any progress at all is to be made , you need to fight the disease , not the symptoms .
You have to ask " Why are these people doing this in the first place ?
" and address that as the root problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 'War on Terror' will prove to be ineffective as the 'War on Drugs'.
When you boil it all down, you are pitting human intelligence against human intelligence.
Humans are very clever critters and will find one way or another around obstacles.
If any progress at all is to be made, you need to fight the disease, not the symptoms.
You have to ask "Why are these people doing this in the first place?
" and address that as the root problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>Wyatt Earp</author>
	<datestamp>1263568560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nonsense.</p><p>First, the US is not an empire. Empires take from their subject states, the United States gives out money, technology and protection. Look at the Roman Empire or British Empire, they levied troops from their subject territories while ripping out the natural resources and taxing trade.</p><p>Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan have never been part of this American Empire you are spouting about. the US sold Saudi Arabia technology, bought oil and let Saudis come to school in the US. Afghanistan's relations with the US were even more tenuous, Iraq was more of a French and Soviet client-state than American ally, while Yemeni-American relations have been distant while the US helped Pakistan for decades against the Soviets and India.</p><p>The UK didn't conquer most of the world, at peak they controlled 1/4 of the land mass and population, and they never controlled the vast bulk of the continental United States.</p><p>Your examples of countries the US "conquered" are all wrong, here are some countries the US did control and did conquer.</p><p>Japan.<br>Western Germany.<br>Italy.<br>South Korea.<br>Central and western United States.</p><p>Look at Israel's economy (a client state of the US) compared to the economy of Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi - they have the highest per capita GDP.</p><p>Take some time to look at Vietnam - the US pulled out, the south was lost and now that its opened up to the west, its booming. Look at the quality of life in Afghanistan now, oh and it's far from conquered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nonsense.First , the US is not an empire .
Empires take from their subject states , the United States gives out money , technology and protection .
Look at the Roman Empire or British Empire , they levied troops from their subject territories while ripping out the natural resources and taxing trade.Saudi Arabia , Afghanistan , Iraq , Yemen , Pakistan have never been part of this American Empire you are spouting about .
the US sold Saudi Arabia technology , bought oil and let Saudis come to school in the US .
Afghanistan 's relations with the US were even more tenuous , Iraq was more of a French and Soviet client-state than American ally , while Yemeni-American relations have been distant while the US helped Pakistan for decades against the Soviets and India.The UK did n't conquer most of the world , at peak they controlled 1/4 of the land mass and population , and they never controlled the vast bulk of the continental United States.Your examples of countries the US " conquered " are all wrong , here are some countries the US did control and did conquer.Japan.Western Germany.Italy.South Korea.Central and western United States.Look at Israel 's economy ( a client state of the US ) compared to the economy of Jordan , Syria , Egypt , Lebanon , Saudi - they have the highest per capita GDP.Take some time to look at Vietnam - the US pulled out , the south was lost and now that its opened up to the west , its booming .
Look at the quality of life in Afghanistan now , oh and it 's far from conquered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nonsense.First, the US is not an empire.
Empires take from their subject states, the United States gives out money, technology and protection.
Look at the Roman Empire or British Empire, they levied troops from their subject territories while ripping out the natural resources and taxing trade.Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan have never been part of this American Empire you are spouting about.
the US sold Saudi Arabia technology, bought oil and let Saudis come to school in the US.
Afghanistan's relations with the US were even more tenuous, Iraq was more of a French and Soviet client-state than American ally, while Yemeni-American relations have been distant while the US helped Pakistan for decades against the Soviets and India.The UK didn't conquer most of the world, at peak they controlled 1/4 of the land mass and population, and they never controlled the vast bulk of the continental United States.Your examples of countries the US "conquered" are all wrong, here are some countries the US did control and did conquer.Japan.Western Germany.Italy.South Korea.Central and western United States.Look at Israel's economy (a client state of the US) compared to the economy of Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi - they have the highest per capita GDP.Take some time to look at Vietnam - the US pulled out, the south was lost and now that its opened up to the west, its booming.
Look at the quality of life in Afghanistan now, oh and it's far from conquered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786446</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263564180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I'm quite sure a career CIA officer with a background in Army intelligence who now works for a Church is your stereotypical 'lefty'.  Did you even read the article?  Certainly there are complex choices to be made, but the rhetoric of '[having to] fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing...' is seemingly part of the problem.  What wonderful allies our Saudi friends are - were it not for oil, maybe we could've just said, "Uh,.. no.", and if Hussein attacked, well, then he attacked.  Hussein, despite his many, many faults, was not a big fan of Islamic fundamentalism either.  Perhaps that'd be g good thing in the region right now.  Regardless, the point is, oil was our motivation for putting troops on the ground, not some devotion to our wonderful allies.  How important is our access to that oil?  Worth the increased threat of terror and the cost of fighting it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I 'm quite sure a career CIA officer with a background in Army intelligence who now works for a Church is your stereotypical 'lefty' .
Did you even read the article ?
Certainly there are complex choices to be made , but the rhetoric of ' [ having to ] fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing... ' is seemingly part of the problem .
What wonderful allies our Saudi friends are - were it not for oil , maybe we could 've just said , " Uh,. .
no. " , and if Hussein attacked , well , then he attacked .
Hussein , despite his many , many faults , was not a big fan of Islamic fundamentalism either .
Perhaps that 'd be g good thing in the region right now .
Regardless , the point is , oil was our motivation for putting troops on the ground , not some devotion to our wonderful allies .
How important is our access to that oil ?
Worth the increased threat of terror and the cost of fighting it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I'm quite sure a career CIA officer with a background in Army intelligence who now works for a Church is your stereotypical 'lefty'.
Did you even read the article?
Certainly there are complex choices to be made, but the rhetoric of '[having to] fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing...' is seemingly part of the problem.
What wonderful allies our Saudi friends are - were it not for oil, maybe we could've just said, "Uh,..
no.", and if Hussein attacked, well, then he attacked.
Hussein, despite his many, many faults, was not a big fan of Islamic fundamentalism either.
Perhaps that'd be g good thing in the region right now.
Regardless, the point is, oil was our motivation for putting troops on the ground, not some devotion to our wonderful allies.
How important is our access to that oil?
Worth the increased threat of terror and the cost of fighting it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789286</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>shaka</author>
	<datestamp>1263644580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>First, the US is not an empire. Empires take from their subject states, the United States gives out money, technology and protection.</p></div><p>There are different kinds of empires. Not all of them do their conquering as blatantly as Genghis Khan or the Spanish conquistas. The British Empire was a trade empire during it's first half, exporting technology, trading and bringing home wealth. Chinese empires have seldom attempted to expand or conquer.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Look at the Roman Empire or British Empire, they levied troops from their subject territories while ripping out the natural resources and taxing trade.</p></div><p>When the US entered Afghanistan, they bought war lords to help them combat the Taliban. The US doesn't tax trade but controls the rules of trade.<br>The US is an empire all right.</p><p>Different empires have different missions, but as imperial missions come, the American mission is pretty similar to the British and the Roman: To spread "civilization" in the name of a christian god. Look to the Spanish empire, the Chinese empires, Tsar Russia and the Soviet Union for other missions.</p><p>I really recommend reading <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Empires-Domination-Ancient-United-States/dp/0745638724/ref=sr\_1\_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1263639851&amp;sr=8-1" title="amazon.com">Empires: The Logic of World Domination from Ancient Rome to the United States</a> [amazon.com] by Herfried M&#252;nkler, a great book which steers clear of the usual theories of imperialism and tries to go beyond, to explain the dynamics of empires, hegemonies and states.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First , the US is not an empire .
Empires take from their subject states , the United States gives out money , technology and protection.There are different kinds of empires .
Not all of them do their conquering as blatantly as Genghis Khan or the Spanish conquistas .
The British Empire was a trade empire during it 's first half , exporting technology , trading and bringing home wealth .
Chinese empires have seldom attempted to expand or conquer.Look at the Roman Empire or British Empire , they levied troops from their subject territories while ripping out the natural resources and taxing trade.When the US entered Afghanistan , they bought war lords to help them combat the Taliban .
The US does n't tax trade but controls the rules of trade.The US is an empire all right.Different empires have different missions , but as imperial missions come , the American mission is pretty similar to the British and the Roman : To spread " civilization " in the name of a christian god .
Look to the Spanish empire , the Chinese empires , Tsar Russia and the Soviet Union for other missions.I really recommend reading Empires : The Logic of World Domination from Ancient Rome to the United States [ amazon.com ] by Herfried M   nkler , a great book which steers clear of the usual theories of imperialism and tries to go beyond , to explain the dynamics of empires , hegemonies and states .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, the US is not an empire.
Empires take from their subject states, the United States gives out money, technology and protection.There are different kinds of empires.
Not all of them do their conquering as blatantly as Genghis Khan or the Spanish conquistas.
The British Empire was a trade empire during it's first half, exporting technology, trading and bringing home wealth.
Chinese empires have seldom attempted to expand or conquer.Look at the Roman Empire or British Empire, they levied troops from their subject territories while ripping out the natural resources and taxing trade.When the US entered Afghanistan, they bought war lords to help them combat the Taliban.
The US doesn't tax trade but controls the rules of trade.The US is an empire all right.Different empires have different missions, but as imperial missions come, the American mission is pretty similar to the British and the Roman: To spread "civilization" in the name of a christian god.
Look to the Spanish empire, the Chinese empires, Tsar Russia and the Soviet Union for other missions.I really recommend reading Empires: The Logic of World Domination from Ancient Rome to the United States [amazon.com] by Herfried Münkler, a great book which steers clear of the usual theories of imperialism and tries to go beyond, to explain the dynamics of empires, hegemonies and states.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788842</id>
	<title>Leading cause of shambling:  new administration</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263638340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We go 7 or 8 years without a terrorist attack, and suddenly we get (at least) 3 in one year.  Difference?  Administration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We go 7 or 8 years without a terrorist attack , and suddenly we get ( at least ) 3 in one year .
Difference ? Administration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We go 7 or 8 years without a terrorist attack, and suddenly we get (at least) 3 in one year.
Difference?  Administration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788456</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>magloca</author>
	<datestamp>1263672360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Your examples of countries the US "conquered" are all wrong, here are some countries the US did control and did conquer.</p><p>Japan.
Western Germany.
Italy.
South Korea.
Central and western United States.</p></div><p>You're proving the very point you're arguing against. Those countries were indeed properly conquered by the US, who then responsibly and honorably proceeded to help them rebuild their infrastructure, adopt democracy, and subsequently regain independence. However... Notice how there are no recent examples in the list? Remember how the US has acted in similar cases recently? Usually, they have gone in, screwed things up even worse than they were before, and then left. Iraq may yet turn out to be different -- probably because they have oil.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your examples of countries the US " conquered " are all wrong , here are some countries the US did control and did conquer.Japan .
Western Germany .
Italy . South Korea .
Central and western United States.You 're proving the very point you 're arguing against .
Those countries were indeed properly conquered by the US , who then responsibly and honorably proceeded to help them rebuild their infrastructure , adopt democracy , and subsequently regain independence .
However... Notice how there are no recent examples in the list ?
Remember how the US has acted in similar cases recently ?
Usually , they have gone in , screwed things up even worse than they were before , and then left .
Iraq may yet turn out to be different -- probably because they have oil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your examples of countries the US "conquered" are all wrong, here are some countries the US did control and did conquer.Japan.
Western Germany.
Italy.
South Korea.
Central and western United States.You're proving the very point you're arguing against.
Those countries were indeed properly conquered by the US, who then responsibly and honorably proceeded to help them rebuild their infrastructure, adopt democracy, and subsequently regain independence.
However... Notice how there are no recent examples in the list?
Remember how the US has acted in similar cases recently?
Usually, they have gone in, screwed things up even worse than they were before, and then left.
Iraq may yet turn out to be different -- probably because they have oil.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787330</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>sp3d2orbit</author>
	<datestamp>1263572040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disagreement with the US's policies does not validate the use of violence towards the US or its citizens. There are ways to change policy without the use of violence -- that is the foundation of civilization.</p><p>Terrorists need to find a way to resolve problems like civilized individuals -- to stop acting like barbarians.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Disagreement with the US 's policies does not validate the use of violence towards the US or its citizens .
There are ways to change policy without the use of violence -- that is the foundation of civilization.Terrorists need to find a way to resolve problems like civilized individuals -- to stop acting like barbarians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disagreement with the US's policies does not validate the use of violence towards the US or its citizens.
There are ways to change policy without the use of violence -- that is the foundation of civilization.Terrorists need to find a way to resolve problems like civilized individuals -- to stop acting like barbarians.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788646</id>
	<title>Wikileaks link please ...</title>
	<author>RockDoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1263633720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For</p><blockquote><div><p>The most effective step would be to release the CIA Inspector General report on intelligence community performance prior to 9/11.</p></div></blockquote><p>?</p><p>OK, that's another tenner into the Wikileaks coffers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ForThe most effective step would be to release the CIA Inspector General report on intelligence community performance prior to 9/11 .
? OK , that 's another tenner into the Wikileaks coffers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ForThe most effective step would be to release the CIA Inspector General report on intelligence community performance prior to 9/11.
?OK, that's another tenner into the Wikileaks coffers.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788432</id>
	<title>Pipe Dreams</title>
	<author>SumterLiving</author>
	<datestamp>1263672000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here is what I got out of this whole thread...The US should:
1.  Educate all poor people of the world.
2.  Dismantle some, most, all of our intelligence agencies.
3.  Fire all politicians.
4.  Don't fear or worry about terrorism.

So what planet do you guy live on?  Great ideas but how do you make them happen.  How about some solutions that we can actually do in the next 10 years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is what I got out of this whole thread...The US should : 1 .
Educate all poor people of the world .
2. Dismantle some , most , all of our intelligence agencies .
3. Fire all politicians .
4. Do n't fear or worry about terrorism .
So what planet do you guy live on ?
Great ideas but how do you make them happen .
How about some solutions that we can actually do in the next 10 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is what I got out of this whole thread...The US should:
1.
Educate all poor people of the world.
2.  Dismantle some, most, all of our intelligence agencies.
3.  Fire all politicians.
4.  Don't fear or worry about terrorism.
So what planet do you guy live on?
Great ideas but how do you make them happen.
How about some solutions that we can actually do in the next 10 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30810616</id>
	<title>I thought...?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1263843180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought it was either because we skipped one season and got stuck with a mini movie,<br>or that CTU had been decommissioned and Jack Bauer was nowhere to be found?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought it was either because we skipped one season and got stuck with a mini movie,or that CTU had been decommissioned and Jack Bauer was nowhere to be found ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought it was either because we skipped one season and got stuck with a mini movie,or that CTU had been decommissioned and Jack Bauer was nowhere to be found?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787522</id>
	<title>Say it with me now. . .</title>
	<author>Fantastic Lad</author>
	<datestamp>1263574200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The terrorists were manufactured.</p><p>The public is persistent and scrappy, and they refuse to let up.  More information keeps cropping up and the threads keep expanding and the picture gets more and more clear.  So any beliefs one might have settled on last year or three years ago or earlier based on the available information and spin at the time always need to be updated.  That's the way of knowledge; Love it or lie to yourself, (and pretend that Popular Mechanics isn't run by cherry-picking true-believers of God and Country).  Anyway, this latest has been put through the crucible since November of last year. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><blockquote><div><p> <b>Pilots for 9/11 Truth has reported that the data stream from the flight data recorder (FDR) for American Airlines flight 77, which allegedly struck the Pentagon on 9/11, shows that the cockpit door never opened during the entire 90 minute flight.</b> The data was provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which has refused to comment.</p><p>The FDR is one of two "black boxes" in every commercial airliner, which are used after accidents to help determine the cause of a crash. One black box records flight data, the other records voice data (everything said in the cockpit during the flight). With those two sets of data, NTSB investigators can usually piece together the events that led to a crash. The status of the door to the cockpit is checked every four seconds throughout a flight and relayed as a simple 0 or 1, where 0=closed and 1=open, with approximately 1,300 door status checks performed during AA77's 90 minute flight. Every one of those door status checks shows as a 0, indicating that the door to the cockpit never opened during the entire flight.</p><p>Reg: <a href="http://rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/post/285492999/flt77fdr" title="tumblr.com">http://rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/post/285492999/flt77fdr</a> [tumblr.com]</p></div></blockquote><p>The forum at <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=18405" title="pilotsfor911truth.org">"Pilots for 9-11 Truth"</a> [pilotsfor911truth.org] is worth lurking in if you want to understand how the flight data recorder info has been examined and what juicy details it has revealed.  (Basically, that the government story is complete horsepoop.)</p><p>So this whole question of so-called "terrorism" is really a big, bad and messy joke.</p><p>-FL</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The terrorists were manufactured.The public is persistent and scrappy , and they refuse to let up .
More information keeps cropping up and the threads keep expanding and the picture gets more and more clear .
So any beliefs one might have settled on last year or three years ago or earlier based on the available information and spin at the time always need to be updated .
That 's the way of knowledge ; Love it or lie to yourself , ( and pretend that Popular Mechanics is n't run by cherry-picking true-believers of God and Country ) .
Anyway , this latest has been put through the crucible since November of last year .
. .
Pilots for 9/11 Truth has reported that the data stream from the flight data recorder ( FDR ) for American Airlines flight 77 , which allegedly struck the Pentagon on 9/11 , shows that the cockpit door never opened during the entire 90 minute flight .
The data was provided by the National Transportation Safety Board ( NTSB ) , which has refused to comment.The FDR is one of two " black boxes " in every commercial airliner , which are used after accidents to help determine the cause of a crash .
One black box records flight data , the other records voice data ( everything said in the cockpit during the flight ) .
With those two sets of data , NTSB investigators can usually piece together the events that led to a crash .
The status of the door to the cockpit is checked every four seconds throughout a flight and relayed as a simple 0 or 1 , where 0 = closed and 1 = open , with approximately 1,300 door status checks performed during AA77 's 90 minute flight .
Every one of those door status checks shows as a 0 , indicating that the door to the cockpit never opened during the entire flight.Reg : http : //rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/post/285492999/flt77fdr [ tumblr.com ] The forum at " Pilots for 9-11 Truth " [ pilotsfor911truth.org ] is worth lurking in if you want to understand how the flight data recorder info has been examined and what juicy details it has revealed .
( Basically , that the government story is complete horsepoop .
) So this whole question of so-called " terrorism " is really a big , bad and messy joke.-FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The terrorists were manufactured.The public is persistent and scrappy, and they refuse to let up.
More information keeps cropping up and the threads keep expanding and the picture gets more and more clear.
So any beliefs one might have settled on last year or three years ago or earlier based on the available information and spin at the time always need to be updated.
That's the way of knowledge; Love it or lie to yourself, (and pretend that Popular Mechanics isn't run by cherry-picking true-believers of God and Country).
Anyway, this latest has been put through the crucible since November of last year.
. .
Pilots for 9/11 Truth has reported that the data stream from the flight data recorder (FDR) for American Airlines flight 77, which allegedly struck the Pentagon on 9/11, shows that the cockpit door never opened during the entire 90 minute flight.
The data was provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which has refused to comment.The FDR is one of two "black boxes" in every commercial airliner, which are used after accidents to help determine the cause of a crash.
One black box records flight data, the other records voice data (everything said in the cockpit during the flight).
With those two sets of data, NTSB investigators can usually piece together the events that led to a crash.
The status of the door to the cockpit is checked every four seconds throughout a flight and relayed as a simple 0 or 1, where 0=closed and 1=open, with approximately 1,300 door status checks performed during AA77's 90 minute flight.
Every one of those door status checks shows as a 0, indicating that the door to the cockpit never opened during the entire flight.Reg: http://rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/post/285492999/flt77fdr [tumblr.com]The forum at "Pilots for 9-11 Truth" [pilotsfor911truth.org] is worth lurking in if you want to understand how the flight data recorder info has been examined and what juicy details it has revealed.
(Basically, that the government story is complete horsepoop.
)So this whole question of so-called "terrorism" is really a big, bad and messy joke.-FL
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787612</id>
	<title>Waste of money!</title>
	<author>fluffykitty1234</author>
	<datestamp>1263575520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If someone proposed that we spend a trillion dollars on building lightning rods around the country to save people from possibly being struck by lighting, you'd probably say, wow that's an incredibly dumb idea.  But yet, the reality is, this incredibly dumb idea would likely end up saving more lives than what we've spent on the "war on terror".</p><p>Americans need to get a grip, we don't need the paternalistic government to protect us, after all on the last two airplane bombing attempts, it was the passengers that jumped the would be bombers.  Let's all just relax a little, ask the politicians to stop spending money hand over fist in the name of safety, and let us live our lives.</p><p>If terrorism ever becomes a real problem, we can revisit this...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If someone proposed that we spend a trillion dollars on building lightning rods around the country to save people from possibly being struck by lighting , you 'd probably say , wow that 's an incredibly dumb idea .
But yet , the reality is , this incredibly dumb idea would likely end up saving more lives than what we 've spent on the " war on terror " .Americans need to get a grip , we do n't need the paternalistic government to protect us , after all on the last two airplane bombing attempts , it was the passengers that jumped the would be bombers .
Let 's all just relax a little , ask the politicians to stop spending money hand over fist in the name of safety , and let us live our lives.If terrorism ever becomes a real problem , we can revisit this.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If someone proposed that we spend a trillion dollars on building lightning rods around the country to save people from possibly being struck by lighting, you'd probably say, wow that's an incredibly dumb idea.
But yet, the reality is, this incredibly dumb idea would likely end up saving more lives than what we've spent on the "war on terror".Americans need to get a grip, we don't need the paternalistic government to protect us, after all on the last two airplane bombing attempts, it was the passengers that jumped the would be bombers.
Let's all just relax a little, ask the politicians to stop spending money hand over fist in the name of safety, and let us live our lives.If terrorism ever becomes a real problem, we can revisit this...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789080</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1263641940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Look at the quality of life in Afghanistan now</p></div></blockquote><p>

Hmmm, the Afghans are living in the middle of a war zone, fair enough apart from the few years under the Taliban this is par for the course in Afghanistan. However it does not make an improvement. The Afghani's are even more impoverished then before, they lack any kind of stable government and heroin use has gone through the roof, I have a mate who does security in Kabul and heroin is easier to get then tobacco. You could argue that things aren't worse for the average Afghani but you cant say things are better. The US dropped the ball on Afghanistan when it pulled it's forces out for that quagmire in Iraq. Without that quagmire things would be a completely different story.<br> <br>

I have to wonder about NATO soldiers getting addicted to heroin, it happened a lot in the Vietnam war. Soldiers would come home addicts and unable to get their lives back together.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at the quality of life in Afghanistan now Hmmm , the Afghans are living in the middle of a war zone , fair enough apart from the few years under the Taliban this is par for the course in Afghanistan .
However it does not make an improvement .
The Afghani 's are even more impoverished then before , they lack any kind of stable government and heroin use has gone through the roof , I have a mate who does security in Kabul and heroin is easier to get then tobacco .
You could argue that things are n't worse for the average Afghani but you cant say things are better .
The US dropped the ball on Afghanistan when it pulled it 's forces out for that quagmire in Iraq .
Without that quagmire things would be a completely different story .
I have to wonder about NATO soldiers getting addicted to heroin , it happened a lot in the Vietnam war .
Soldiers would come home addicts and unable to get their lives back together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at the quality of life in Afghanistan now

Hmmm, the Afghans are living in the middle of a war zone, fair enough apart from the few years under the Taliban this is par for the course in Afghanistan.
However it does not make an improvement.
The Afghani's are even more impoverished then before, they lack any kind of stable government and heroin use has gone through the roof, I have a mate who does security in Kabul and heroin is easier to get then tobacco.
You could argue that things aren't worse for the average Afghani but you cant say things are better.
The US dropped the ball on Afghanistan when it pulled it's forces out for that quagmire in Iraq.
Without that quagmire things would be a completely different story.
I have to wonder about NATO soldiers getting addicted to heroin, it happened a lot in the Vietnam war.
Soldiers would come home addicts and unable to get their lives back together.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786490</id>
	<title>Oh ffs people.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263564480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Terrorists are trolls.<br> <br>

Don't feed the trolls, it's fucking simple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Terrorists are trolls .
Do n't feed the trolls , it 's fucking simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terrorists are trolls.
Don't feed the trolls, it's fucking simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</id>
	<title>agree with the spirit, but some of the details...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263564180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm basically on board with McGovern, but some of the particulars stuck out to me as half-baked: "Add Washington's propping up of dictatorial, repressive regimes in order to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas -- widely (and accurately) seen as one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan." I think it's true that the US props up dictatorial, repressive regimes in the Middle East and southern Asia (Kuwait, Pahlavi's Iran,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...). I think it's true that we would never have gone to war in Kuwait/Iraq in 1991, Afghanistan in 2001, or Iraq in 2003, if this hadn't been an oil-producing region. This is clearest in the case of Kuwait, and also reasonably clear in the 2003 Iraq invasion, since the WMD pretext was obviously bogus. The least clear one is Afghanistan, which really did have at least some reasonable justification in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks -- although if the region had never had oil, it would have made more sense to invade Saudi Arabia, from which 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists originated.</p><p>
But how can McGovern say that "one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan" was "to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas?" This doesn't make any sense. Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003. The invasion devastated oil production. And Afghanistan has never been a big oil producer.
</p><p>
I think it would be more accurate to say that we went to war in Kuwait in 1991 in order to stabilize the Middle East oil producing region, and we went to war in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 as knee-jerk reactions to the 9/11 attacks (which is pretty pathetic, because the whole purpose of terrorism is basically to cause a knee-jerk reaction).
</p><p>
He makes a big deal out of how nobody admits that one of the main motivations for terrorist attacks on the US is anger about Israel.  This is undeniably true. The problem is, what the heck can we do about it now? We tried to hand democracy and territory to the Palestinians on a silver platter, and they messed up. Is there some obvious solution to the Israel problem that I'm missing?
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm basically on board with McGovern , but some of the particulars stuck out to me as half-baked : " Add Washington 's propping up of dictatorial , repressive regimes in order to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas -- widely ( and accurately ) seen as one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan .
" I think it 's true that the US props up dictatorial , repressive regimes in the Middle East and southern Asia ( Kuwait , Pahlavi 's Iran , ... ) .
I think it 's true that we would never have gone to war in Kuwait/Iraq in 1991 , Afghanistan in 2001 , or Iraq in 2003 , if this had n't been an oil-producing region .
This is clearest in the case of Kuwait , and also reasonably clear in the 2003 Iraq invasion , since the WMD pretext was obviously bogus .
The least clear one is Afghanistan , which really did have at least some reasonable justification in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks -- although if the region had never had oil , it would have made more sense to invade Saudi Arabia , from which 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists originated .
But how can McGovern say that " one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan " was " to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas ?
" This does n't make any sense .
Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003 .
The invasion devastated oil production .
And Afghanistan has never been a big oil producer .
I think it would be more accurate to say that we went to war in Kuwait in 1991 in order to stabilize the Middle East oil producing region , and we went to war in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 as knee-jerk reactions to the 9/11 attacks ( which is pretty pathetic , because the whole purpose of terrorism is basically to cause a knee-jerk reaction ) .
He makes a big deal out of how nobody admits that one of the main motivations for terrorist attacks on the US is anger about Israel .
This is undeniably true .
The problem is , what the heck can we do about it now ?
We tried to hand democracy and territory to the Palestinians on a silver platter , and they messed up .
Is there some obvious solution to the Israel problem that I 'm missing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm basically on board with McGovern, but some of the particulars stuck out to me as half-baked: "Add Washington's propping up of dictatorial, repressive regimes in order to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas -- widely (and accurately) seen as one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
" I think it's true that the US props up dictatorial, repressive regimes in the Middle East and southern Asia (Kuwait, Pahlavi's Iran, ...).
I think it's true that we would never have gone to war in Kuwait/Iraq in 1991, Afghanistan in 2001, or Iraq in 2003, if this hadn't been an oil-producing region.
This is clearest in the case of Kuwait, and also reasonably clear in the 2003 Iraq invasion, since the WMD pretext was obviously bogus.
The least clear one is Afghanistan, which really did have at least some reasonable justification in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks -- although if the region had never had oil, it would have made more sense to invade Saudi Arabia, from which 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists originated.
But how can McGovern say that "one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan" was "to secure continuing access to oil and natural gas?
" This doesn't make any sense.
Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003.
The invasion devastated oil production.
And Afghanistan has never been a big oil producer.
I think it would be more accurate to say that we went to war in Kuwait in 1991 in order to stabilize the Middle East oil producing region, and we went to war in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 as knee-jerk reactions to the 9/11 attacks (which is pretty pathetic, because the whole purpose of terrorism is basically to cause a knee-jerk reaction).
He makes a big deal out of how nobody admits that one of the main motivations for terrorist attacks on the US is anger about Israel.
This is undeniably true.
The problem is, what the heck can we do about it now?
We tried to hand democracy and territory to the Palestinians on a silver platter, and they messed up.
Is there some obvious solution to the Israel problem that I'm missing?
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786604</id>
	<title>I'll tell you why</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263565200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The elites, members of the large corporations, who lobby our government into passing the laws that only help large corporations, and their "New World Order" agendas, and hurt the people - are the \_real\_ terrorists here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The elites , members of the large corporations , who lobby our government into passing the laws that only help large corporations , and their " New World Order " agendas , and hurt the people - are the \ _real \ _ terrorists here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The elites, members of the large corporations, who lobby our government into passing the laws that only help large corporations, and their "New World Order" agendas, and hurt the people - are the \_real\_ terrorists here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787962</id>
	<title>Counter-Terrorism is in shambles because..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263579240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CTU was shutdown and Jack Bauer was made to stand before congress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CTU was shutdown and Jack Bauer was made to stand before congress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CTU was shutdown and Jack Bauer was made to stand before congress.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787706</id>
	<title>The Family Feud is over!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263576540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dose it really matter? The Family Feud is over, Bush is gone, and the disgruntled children of the Saudi Royal family don't care any more.<br>Play time for the warmongers of the world is over, and without the precedent of a ignorant, corrupt and deceitful government to give any crazy the excuse to commit atrocious actions, in the name of freedom, I hope, that time is over.</p><p>When a country that has never had a real war on it's own soil, starts to think that war is profitable, and sound political policy, what hope do we have? War is NOT an industry or profitable, its a horrific waist of human life, that should be avoided at all costs!!</p><p>Name the corrupt and those that are responsible and show the world(and the people that have been demonised) that your committed to correcting the mistakes of your predecessors, mistakes we are all having to deal with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dose it really matter ?
The Family Feud is over , Bush is gone , and the disgruntled children of the Saudi Royal family do n't care any more.Play time for the warmongers of the world is over , and without the precedent of a ignorant , corrupt and deceitful government to give any crazy the excuse to commit atrocious actions , in the name of freedom , I hope , that time is over.When a country that has never had a real war on it 's own soil , starts to think that war is profitable , and sound political policy , what hope do we have ?
War is NOT an industry or profitable , its a horrific waist of human life , that should be avoided at all costs !
! Name the corrupt and those that are responsible and show the world ( and the people that have been demonised ) that your committed to correcting the mistakes of your predecessors , mistakes we are all having to deal with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dose it really matter?
The Family Feud is over, Bush is gone, and the disgruntled children of the Saudi Royal family don't care any more.Play time for the warmongers of the world is over, and without the precedent of a ignorant, corrupt and deceitful government to give any crazy the excuse to commit atrocious actions, in the name of freedom, I hope, that time is over.When a country that has never had a real war on it's own soil, starts to think that war is profitable, and sound political policy, what hope do we have?
War is NOT an industry or profitable, its a horrific waist of human life, that should be avoided at all costs!
!Name the corrupt and those that are responsible and show the world(and the people that have been demonised) that your committed to correcting the mistakes of your predecessors, mistakes we are all having to deal with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786772</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1263566460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>But this is difficult for lefties to get. You cant just do what everyone wants you to do because they will threaten you if you dont. Sometimes you have to just fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing (or one has to submit).</i>
<br>
<br>
Your cowardice sickens me.  Waaah, the world is so scary that we need to shoot at everything that moves otherwise they might come after us.  Grow a backbone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But this is difficult for lefties to get .
You cant just do what everyone wants you to do because they will threaten you if you dont .
Sometimes you have to just fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing ( or one has to submit ) .
Your cowardice sickens me .
Waaah , the world is so scary that we need to shoot at everything that moves otherwise they might come after us .
Grow a backbone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But this is difficult for lefties to get.
You cant just do what everyone wants you to do because they will threaten you if you dont.
Sometimes you have to just fight back until either you or your enemy are no longer standing (or one has to submit).
Your cowardice sickens me.
Waaah, the world is so scary that we need to shoot at everything that moves otherwise they might come after us.
Grow a backbone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790566</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263659820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nonsense.</p><p>First, the US is not an empire. Empires take from their subject states, the United States gives out money, technology and protection.</p> </div><p>I call BS.</p><p>Empires give all the above and always expect one thing in return. Silent Unquestioned Obedience. Its called hegemony. If you had read any history by yourself and tried to understand, you would easily come to the same conclusion. It remains true for all empires, at all places and all times. Instead you are merely regurgitating what you heard from someone, somewhere, maybe from some 'expert' on one of those 'unbiased' news channels...or some idiots editorial who never read or understood history but wrote with a lot of passion.</p><p>You see, the problem when you start a post this way, it tells us exactly what rubbish the rest of the post is going to be and there is no point reading further.</p><p>Ofcourse I am being condescending, and I am ashamed (thus AC) and apologize, but I hope you are still not too old to develop critical thinking and decide for yourself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nonsense.First , the US is not an empire .
Empires take from their subject states , the United States gives out money , technology and protection .
I call BS.Empires give all the above and always expect one thing in return .
Silent Unquestioned Obedience .
Its called hegemony .
If you had read any history by yourself and tried to understand , you would easily come to the same conclusion .
It remains true for all empires , at all places and all times .
Instead you are merely regurgitating what you heard from someone , somewhere , maybe from some 'expert ' on one of those 'unbiased ' news channels...or some idiots editorial who never read or understood history but wrote with a lot of passion.You see , the problem when you start a post this way , it tells us exactly what rubbish the rest of the post is going to be and there is no point reading further.Ofcourse I am being condescending , and I am ashamed ( thus AC ) and apologize , but I hope you are still not too old to develop critical thinking and decide for yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nonsense.First, the US is not an empire.
Empires take from their subject states, the United States gives out money, technology and protection.
I call BS.Empires give all the above and always expect one thing in return.
Silent Unquestioned Obedience.
Its called hegemony.
If you had read any history by yourself and tried to understand, you would easily come to the same conclusion.
It remains true for all empires, at all places and all times.
Instead you are merely regurgitating what you heard from someone, somewhere, maybe from some 'expert' on one of those 'unbiased' news channels...or some idiots editorial who never read or understood history but wrote with a lot of passion.You see, the problem when you start a post this way, it tells us exactly what rubbish the rest of the post is going to be and there is no point reading further.Ofcourse I am being condescending, and I am ashamed (thus AC) and apologize, but I hope you are still not too old to develop critical thinking and decide for yourself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786884</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>Latinhypercube</author>
	<datestamp>1263567240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or, as stated in the 9/11 commission report, the U.S. was attacked because of it's financial and political support of Israel's war and apartheid against Palestinians.
<br>
A policy change by the U.S. on Israel, to pressure it into peace, would arguably make the U.S. much safer than counter terrorism.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , as stated in the 9/11 commission report , the U.S. was attacked because of it 's financial and political support of Israel 's war and apartheid against Palestinians .
A policy change by the U.S. on Israel , to pressure it into peace , would arguably make the U.S. much safer than counter terrorism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, as stated in the 9/11 commission report, the U.S. was attacked because of it's financial and political support of Israel's war and apartheid against Palestinians.
A policy change by the U.S. on Israel, to pressure it into peace, would arguably make the U.S. much safer than counter terrorism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786748</id>
	<title>You can't win a war on a word</title>
	<author>aaandre</author>
	<datestamp>1263566280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Especially if you keep redefining the word. Simple as that.</p><p>What if this was never about winning a war (on a word) but rather redirecting attention from the war on human rights and personal freedoms (many of which defined in the Constitution everyone loves foaming about), in the interest of money-driven slavery and mass-mind control?</p><p>Now, put *this* in your pipe and smoke it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Or, wake up and get off the grid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Especially if you keep redefining the word .
Simple as that.What if this was never about winning a war ( on a word ) but rather redirecting attention from the war on human rights and personal freedoms ( many of which defined in the Constitution everyone loves foaming about ) , in the interest of money-driven slavery and mass-mind control ? Now , put * this * in your pipe and smoke it : ) Or , wake up and get off the grid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Especially if you keep redefining the word.
Simple as that.What if this was never about winning a war (on a word) but rather redirecting attention from the war on human rights and personal freedoms (many of which defined in the Constitution everyone loves foaming about), in the interest of money-driven slavery and mass-mind control?Now, put *this* in your pipe and smoke it :)Or, wake up and get off the grid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786440</id>
	<title>Axe to grind</title>
	<author>Lawrence\_Bird</author>
	<datestamp>1263564180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly there is an axe to grind here, probably for more than what Tenet deserves.  That said, what is left out of this critique is the failings of policy makers who in fact determine what the intelligence community focuses on.   When policy makers (be they politicians or career employees) focus on short term intelligence needs the IC must reallocate resources to address those wants.  Inevitably this is at the expense of longer term intelligence gathering and asset development.   Then when something does go wrong or a situation blows up the IC is left scrabling to 'advise' the policy makers on subjects they really do not have sufficiently extensive information on.  See Iran, UBL, Iraq.  The author does, however, point out how policy decisions made by elected politicians and career govt employees, such as perceived unbalanced support of Israel, can create unfavorable outcomes.  What the IC had to say about possible ramifications of those decisions is of course affected by what intelligence they have previously developed on the subject which may have glaring holes when it lacks strategic, long term focus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly there is an axe to grind here , probably for more than what Tenet deserves .
That said , what is left out of this critique is the failings of policy makers who in fact determine what the intelligence community focuses on .
When policy makers ( be they politicians or career employees ) focus on short term intelligence needs the IC must reallocate resources to address those wants .
Inevitably this is at the expense of longer term intelligence gathering and asset development .
Then when something does go wrong or a situation blows up the IC is left scrabling to 'advise ' the policy makers on subjects they really do not have sufficiently extensive information on .
See Iran , UBL , Iraq .
The author does , however , point out how policy decisions made by elected politicians and career govt employees , such as perceived unbalanced support of Israel , can create unfavorable outcomes .
What the IC had to say about possible ramifications of those decisions is of course affected by what intelligence they have previously developed on the subject which may have glaring holes when it lacks strategic , long term focus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly there is an axe to grind here, probably for more than what Tenet deserves.
That said, what is left out of this critique is the failings of policy makers who in fact determine what the intelligence community focuses on.
When policy makers (be they politicians or career employees) focus on short term intelligence needs the IC must reallocate resources to address those wants.
Inevitably this is at the expense of longer term intelligence gathering and asset development.
Then when something does go wrong or a situation blows up the IC is left scrabling to 'advise' the policy makers on subjects they really do not have sufficiently extensive information on.
See Iran, UBL, Iraq.
The author does, however, point out how policy decisions made by elected politicians and career govt employees, such as perceived unbalanced support of Israel, can create unfavorable outcomes.
What the IC had to say about possible ramifications of those decisions is of course affected by what intelligence they have previously developed on the subject which may have glaring holes when it lacks strategic, long term focus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789390</id>
	<title>The real picture</title>
	<author>El Nigromante</author>
	<datestamp>1263646140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone stated wisely, in a previous comment, that you should attack disease's roots, not symptoms.</p><p>-------</p><p>The fundamental origins of current islamic terrorism lay in old Cold War's "dirty" strategies carried out by both blocks (mainly USSR and USA), in order to undermine the enemy's stability.</p><p>- USA funded and supported today's talibans (and Ben Laden) against USSR, and the Iraq of Saddam Hussein (against Iran). I would not be surprised if any Western help (of any kind) had supported Chechenian "terrorists".</p><p>- USSR has continuously supported Palestinian terrorism and Iran's activities (against Israeli and American influence in the Middle East). The support from Russia to current anti-american parties and forces in Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru and Cuba is also evident.</p><p>Saying that Cold War is ended just because the flags of some countries changed colour is just a joke. It will not end as long as irresponsible politicians and military commanders, with psycho minded profiles, keep ruling the most powerful countries in the world (same for their allies). And as long as people do not use their heads when voting.</p><p>Regarding the statements above, it is highly probable the real truth has not been told about Irak and Afghanistan wars. Warning hostile nations might have been another one of the objectives to be achieved. You may call them "preventive" wars.</p><p>-------</p><p>On the other hand, Islamic terrorism is not the first one to be used as a political / lobby influence weapon. USA (with many citizens with Irish origins) has tradicionally given a "mild" treat and media coverage - just to say it softly - to IRA terrorists. More or less the same has happend with France and other countries - USA too - to Spanish ETA terrorist group. In the case of ETA, France began to fight its criminal activities when they started to cause harm to French prestige and security.</p><p>You have the funny example of "The Jackal" remake: a former IRA terrorist (Richard Gere) and his former girlfriend and ETA terrorist are presented as old warriors for indepence, who help FBI in their investigations. Well, you must call them "terrorists" when they perform massive killings, kidnapping, extortion and other activities of the kind.</p><p>-------</p><p>Now comes another funny example with body scanners for airports. A "fair" meassure just to avoid incidents like those not prevented because of intelligence agencies' incompetence.</p><p>-------</p><p>As a summary, I think:</p><p>- Security threats should not be either overestimated or underestimated: just take appropriate measures actually proved "and not believed" to be effective.</p><p>- Don't feed ANY beast. If you think you are going to keep control you are underestimating it. You asshole. You may not be as intelligent as you think you are just because you attended a military academy or expensive university (if any). Common sense cannot be learnt but at your own home.</p><p>- Act honestly, and you will save your own reputation around the world, and all those bitches will have less stupid reasons to gather stupid dumbasses willing to blow themselves to shit.</p><p>- That includes providing your citizens with fair and enough information, and wasting their money wisely.</p><p>- If you are a citizen, watch less TV and read more books. You may start reading Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone stated wisely , in a previous comment , that you should attack disease 's roots , not symptoms.-------The fundamental origins of current islamic terrorism lay in old Cold War 's " dirty " strategies carried out by both blocks ( mainly USSR and USA ) , in order to undermine the enemy 's stability.- USA funded and supported today 's talibans ( and Ben Laden ) against USSR , and the Iraq of Saddam Hussein ( against Iran ) .
I would not be surprised if any Western help ( of any kind ) had supported Chechenian " terrorists " .- USSR has continuously supported Palestinian terrorism and Iran 's activities ( against Israeli and American influence in the Middle East ) .
The support from Russia to current anti-american parties and forces in Venezuela , Bolivia , Peru and Cuba is also evident.Saying that Cold War is ended just because the flags of some countries changed colour is just a joke .
It will not end as long as irresponsible politicians and military commanders , with psycho minded profiles , keep ruling the most powerful countries in the world ( same for their allies ) .
And as long as people do not use their heads when voting.Regarding the statements above , it is highly probable the real truth has not been told about Irak and Afghanistan wars .
Warning hostile nations might have been another one of the objectives to be achieved .
You may call them " preventive " wars.-------On the other hand , Islamic terrorism is not the first one to be used as a political / lobby influence weapon .
USA ( with many citizens with Irish origins ) has tradicionally given a " mild " treat and media coverage - just to say it softly - to IRA terrorists .
More or less the same has happend with France and other countries - USA too - to Spanish ETA terrorist group .
In the case of ETA , France began to fight its criminal activities when they started to cause harm to French prestige and security.You have the funny example of " The Jackal " remake : a former IRA terrorist ( Richard Gere ) and his former girlfriend and ETA terrorist are presented as old warriors for indepence , who help FBI in their investigations .
Well , you must call them " terrorists " when they perform massive killings , kidnapping , extortion and other activities of the kind.-------Now comes another funny example with body scanners for airports .
A " fair " meassure just to avoid incidents like those not prevented because of intelligence agencies ' incompetence.-------As a summary , I think : - Security threats should not be either overestimated or underestimated : just take appropriate measures actually proved " and not believed " to be effective.- Do n't feed ANY beast .
If you think you are going to keep control you are underestimating it .
You asshole .
You may not be as intelligent as you think you are just because you attended a military academy or expensive university ( if any ) .
Common sense can not be learnt but at your own home.- Act honestly , and you will save your own reputation around the world , and all those bitches will have less stupid reasons to gather stupid dumbasses willing to blow themselves to shit.- That includes providing your citizens with fair and enough information , and wasting their money wisely.- If you are a citizen , watch less TV and read more books .
You may start reading Ray Bradbury 's Fahrenheit 451 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone stated wisely, in a previous comment, that you should attack disease's roots, not symptoms.-------The fundamental origins of current islamic terrorism lay in old Cold War's "dirty" strategies carried out by both blocks (mainly USSR and USA), in order to undermine the enemy's stability.- USA funded and supported today's talibans (and Ben Laden) against USSR, and the Iraq of Saddam Hussein (against Iran).
I would not be surprised if any Western help (of any kind) had supported Chechenian "terrorists".- USSR has continuously supported Palestinian terrorism and Iran's activities (against Israeli and American influence in the Middle East).
The support from Russia to current anti-american parties and forces in Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru and Cuba is also evident.Saying that Cold War is ended just because the flags of some countries changed colour is just a joke.
It will not end as long as irresponsible politicians and military commanders, with psycho minded profiles, keep ruling the most powerful countries in the world (same for their allies).
And as long as people do not use their heads when voting.Regarding the statements above, it is highly probable the real truth has not been told about Irak and Afghanistan wars.
Warning hostile nations might have been another one of the objectives to be achieved.
You may call them "preventive" wars.-------On the other hand, Islamic terrorism is not the first one to be used as a political / lobby influence weapon.
USA (with many citizens with Irish origins) has tradicionally given a "mild" treat and media coverage - just to say it softly - to IRA terrorists.
More or less the same has happend with France and other countries - USA too - to Spanish ETA terrorist group.
In the case of ETA, France began to fight its criminal activities when they started to cause harm to French prestige and security.You have the funny example of "The Jackal" remake: a former IRA terrorist (Richard Gere) and his former girlfriend and ETA terrorist are presented as old warriors for indepence, who help FBI in their investigations.
Well, you must call them "terrorists" when they perform massive killings, kidnapping, extortion and other activities of the kind.-------Now comes another funny example with body scanners for airports.
A "fair" meassure just to avoid incidents like those not prevented because of intelligence agencies' incompetence.-------As a summary, I think:- Security threats should not be either overestimated or underestimated: just take appropriate measures actually proved "and not believed" to be effective.- Don't feed ANY beast.
If you think you are going to keep control you are underestimating it.
You asshole.
You may not be as intelligent as you think you are just because you attended a military academy or expensive university (if any).
Common sense cannot be learnt but at your own home.- Act honestly, and you will save your own reputation around the world, and all those bitches will have less stupid reasons to gather stupid dumbasses willing to blow themselves to shit.- That includes providing your citizens with fair and enough information, and wasting their money wisely.- If you are a citizen, watch less TV and read more books.
You may start reading Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788594</id>
	<title>Evolution is driven by altruism.</title>
	<author>Msdose</author>
	<datestamp>1263632400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The history of the world is 10000 religions leading their adherents to extinction in religious wars. All religions do eugenics; they breed their people to be supportive of and subservient to the administration. This leads to evolutionary losers who must be culled to maintain the successful adaptations to the environment. Eugenically modified populations cannot compete. So the eugenically modified populations are attacking the superior adaptations in an altruistic suicide to remove themselves from the gene pool. It is only our subservience to the godless religion of political correctness that interferes with our duty to our species. Of course, this godless religion is also doing eugenics on us to breed us into submission, so in the future we will become the subspecies to be culled. Nature always wins, thankfully.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The history of the world is 10000 religions leading their adherents to extinction in religious wars .
All religions do eugenics ; they breed their people to be supportive of and subservient to the administration .
This leads to evolutionary losers who must be culled to maintain the successful adaptations to the environment .
Eugenically modified populations can not compete .
So the eugenically modified populations are attacking the superior adaptations in an altruistic suicide to remove themselves from the gene pool .
It is only our subservience to the godless religion of political correctness that interferes with our duty to our species .
Of course , this godless religion is also doing eugenics on us to breed us into submission , so in the future we will become the subspecies to be culled .
Nature always wins , thankfully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The history of the world is 10000 religions leading their adherents to extinction in religious wars.
All religions do eugenics; they breed their people to be supportive of and subservient to the administration.
This leads to evolutionary losers who must be culled to maintain the successful adaptations to the environment.
Eugenically modified populations cannot compete.
So the eugenically modified populations are attacking the superior adaptations in an altruistic suicide to remove themselves from the gene pool.
It is only our subservience to the godless religion of political correctness that interferes with our duty to our species.
Of course, this godless religion is also doing eugenics on us to breed us into submission, so in the future we will become the subspecies to be culled.
Nature always wins, thankfully.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30796684</id>
	<title>Re:agree with the spirit, but some of the details.</title>
	<author>sincewhen</author>
	<datestamp>1263718980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003.</p></div><p>Googling "Iraq oil Bourse" the first hit is <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html" title="globalresearch.ca">this page</a> [globalresearch.ca].
<br>
I quote:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It is now obvious the invasion of Iraq had less to do with any threat from Saddam&rsquo;s long-gone WMD program and certainly less to do to do with fighting International terrorism than it has to do with gaining control over Iraq&rsquo;s hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintaining the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market.</p></div><p>
You see, Iraq had decided to sell their oil for Euros, not US Dollars. If this continued, and other oil-producing nations followed suit, it would have been very bad for the US economy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003.Googling " Iraq oil Bourse " the first hit is this page [ globalresearch.ca ] .
I quote : It is now obvious the invasion of Iraq had less to do with any threat from Saddam    s long-gone WMD program and certainly less to do to do with fighting International terrorism than it has to do with gaining control over Iraq    s hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintaining the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market .
You see , Iraq had decided to sell their oil for Euros , not US Dollars .
If this continued , and other oil-producing nations followed suit , it would have been very bad for the US economy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Saddam Hussein was exporting oil before we invaded in 2003.Googling "Iraq oil Bourse" the first hit is this page [globalresearch.ca].
I quote:It is now obvious the invasion of Iraq had less to do with any threat from Saddam’s long-gone WMD program and certainly less to do to do with fighting International terrorism than it has to do with gaining control over Iraq’s hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintaining the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market.
You see, Iraq had decided to sell their oil for Euros, not US Dollars.
If this continued, and other oil-producing nations followed suit, it would have been very bad for the US economy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787236</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263571200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before.</p></div><p>When did the US conquer Vietnam? I must have been asleep during that part of the movie. . .</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The US , OTOH , conquered Iran , Afghanistan , Vietnam , and those places are the same shitholes they were before.When did the US conquer Vietnam ?
I must have been asleep during that part of the movie .
. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US, OTOH, conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and those places are the same shitholes they were before.When did the US conquer Vietnam?
I must have been asleep during that part of the movie.
. .
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30791662</id>
	<title>Isn't it obvious?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263668160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The T are hacking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The T are hacking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The T are hacking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787462</id>
	<title>The best way for the USA to stop terrorism</title>
	<author>Ralph Spoilsport</author>
	<datestamp>1263573540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>is to renounce empire. To become 5\% of the world's population, no more no less, consuming 5\% of the world's resources, no more, no less.
<p>
Do that, and it is very likely Al Qaeda will stop fucking with you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is to renounce empire .
To become 5 \ % of the world 's population , no more no less , consuming 5 \ % of the world 's resources , no more , no less .
Do that , and it is very likely Al Qaeda will stop fucking with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is to renounce empire.
To become 5\% of the world's population, no more no less, consuming 5\% of the world's resources, no more, no less.
Do that, and it is very likely Al Qaeda will stop fucking with you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789314</id>
	<title>Re:agree with the spirit, but some of the details.</title>
	<author>RogerWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1263645000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) After the first gulf war, Saddam kicked out all the US/UK based companies, and got for example the French Total to produce the oil instead. The first thing that happened after the 2003 invasion was that Total and friends got kicked out, and Shell, BP and Exxon got the rights to produce oil back.<br>Also the US was worried that in the long term their bases in Saudi Arabia would not be tolerated, so they were looking for another spot.</p><p>2) As far as afganistan was concerned, it probably has something to do with the "Trans Afganistan Pipeline" and such. See the AC reply to your post.</p><p>Sorry that I do not provide sources, I don't have the time to google for them now. Maybe someone else can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) After the first gulf war , Saddam kicked out all the US/UK based companies , and got for example the French Total to produce the oil instead .
The first thing that happened after the 2003 invasion was that Total and friends got kicked out , and Shell , BP and Exxon got the rights to produce oil back.Also the US was worried that in the long term their bases in Saudi Arabia would not be tolerated , so they were looking for another spot.2 ) As far as afganistan was concerned , it probably has something to do with the " Trans Afganistan Pipeline " and such .
See the AC reply to your post.Sorry that I do not provide sources , I do n't have the time to google for them now .
Maybe someone else can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) After the first gulf war, Saddam kicked out all the US/UK based companies, and got for example the French Total to produce the oil instead.
The first thing that happened after the 2003 invasion was that Total and friends got kicked out, and Shell, BP and Exxon got the rights to produce oil back.Also the US was worried that in the long term their bases in Saudi Arabia would not be tolerated, so they were looking for another spot.2) As far as afganistan was concerned, it probably has something to do with the "Trans Afganistan Pipeline" and such.
See the AC reply to your post.Sorry that I do not provide sources, I don't have the time to google for them now.
Maybe someone else can.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787038</id>
	<title>Dabbling at maintaining the world order</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1263568680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's been the world's complaint for years.  Israel is big and bad enough to look after itself and doesn't need free bombs with "made in USA" written on them to make Syrians, Lebanese and their own citizens angry at the USA after the bombs kill their children.  Indonesia, East Timor, the Phillipines and most of Latin America has suffered from poor US intelligence getting manipulated by the unscrupulous.  They pushed the line "give me help or the commies get in" or "thanks for coming to my country, here's a big donation to your party Mr Ford, we invade tommorrow before they turn into commies (1975)" and played the US like a banjo.<br>It's the stupid little mistakes that create the mess - propping up an evil bastard like the Shah was a mistake but letting him into the country after he was deposed was the thing that made an enemy out of Iran.  Similarly going into Lebanon to "show the flag" in a poorly conceived operation convinced the world that the USA would cut and run at the first sign of trouble.  Sending some token warships into the Iran-Iraq war was a fiasco that did nothing but make people very angry (no minesweeper so the ships hid behind the tankers they were supposed to protect, US ships attacked by Iraqi allies, and an airliner shot down that provoked a revenge attack on a PanAm 747 over Scotland).<br>Sometimes it's better to sit back and watch instead of dabbling at helping one thug beat another.  The real lesson of this mistakes is to take things seriously when action is taken - no stupid halfhearted "show the flag" exercises that just get people killed for a minor political advantage.  It should be a wake up call when the guy you've been backing orders a car bombing to kill a political opponent in Washington D.C. (Pinochet 1976), but it wasn't.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's been the world 's complaint for years .
Israel is big and bad enough to look after itself and does n't need free bombs with " made in USA " written on them to make Syrians , Lebanese and their own citizens angry at the USA after the bombs kill their children .
Indonesia , East Timor , the Phillipines and most of Latin America has suffered from poor US intelligence getting manipulated by the unscrupulous .
They pushed the line " give me help or the commies get in " or " thanks for coming to my country , here 's a big donation to your party Mr Ford , we invade tommorrow before they turn into commies ( 1975 ) " and played the US like a banjo.It 's the stupid little mistakes that create the mess - propping up an evil bastard like the Shah was a mistake but letting him into the country after he was deposed was the thing that made an enemy out of Iran .
Similarly going into Lebanon to " show the flag " in a poorly conceived operation convinced the world that the USA would cut and run at the first sign of trouble .
Sending some token warships into the Iran-Iraq war was a fiasco that did nothing but make people very angry ( no minesweeper so the ships hid behind the tankers they were supposed to protect , US ships attacked by Iraqi allies , and an airliner shot down that provoked a revenge attack on a PanAm 747 over Scotland ) .Sometimes it 's better to sit back and watch instead of dabbling at helping one thug beat another .
The real lesson of this mistakes is to take things seriously when action is taken - no stupid halfhearted " show the flag " exercises that just get people killed for a minor political advantage .
It should be a wake up call when the guy you 've been backing orders a car bombing to kill a political opponent in Washington D.C. ( Pinochet 1976 ) , but it was n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's been the world's complaint for years.
Israel is big and bad enough to look after itself and doesn't need free bombs with "made in USA" written on them to make Syrians, Lebanese and their own citizens angry at the USA after the bombs kill their children.
Indonesia, East Timor, the Phillipines and most of Latin America has suffered from poor US intelligence getting manipulated by the unscrupulous.
They pushed the line "give me help or the commies get in" or "thanks for coming to my country, here's a big donation to your party Mr Ford, we invade tommorrow before they turn into commies (1975)" and played the US like a banjo.It's the stupid little mistakes that create the mess - propping up an evil bastard like the Shah was a mistake but letting him into the country after he was deposed was the thing that made an enemy out of Iran.
Similarly going into Lebanon to "show the flag" in a poorly conceived operation convinced the world that the USA would cut and run at the first sign of trouble.
Sending some token warships into the Iran-Iraq war was a fiasco that did nothing but make people very angry (no minesweeper so the ships hid behind the tankers they were supposed to protect, US ships attacked by Iraqi allies, and an airliner shot down that provoked a revenge attack on a PanAm 747 over Scotland).Sometimes it's better to sit back and watch instead of dabbling at helping one thug beat another.
The real lesson of this mistakes is to take things seriously when action is taken - no stupid halfhearted "show the flag" exercises that just get people killed for a minor political advantage.
It should be a wake up call when the guy you've been backing orders a car bombing to kill a political opponent in Washington D.C. (Pinochet 1976), but it wasn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788536</id>
	<title>But they've already won!</title>
	<author>a0schweitzer</author>
	<datestamp>1263674400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those who attacked the US on 9/11, and those who subsequently commit acts of terrorism against Americans are <b>not</b> trying to kill Americans.</p><p>So many of the tactics being employed against terrorism are put in place because there is a widespread fear that "They're out to kill us! If we leave them alone, or if we don't actively combat terrorism, more innocent American civilians will die."</p><p>This is the wrong mindset, and the wrong problem to focus resources on. The terrorists attacking the US are not out to kill Americans. They do not want to "kill the infidels!". They are opposed to the expansive, capitalist, commercialized society America is and represents. They are opposed to "the Man", as we like to say. Our Man. The westernized Man.</p><p>By committing acts of terrorism, the attackers aim to weaken the unity of western society, disrupt our way of life, turn us against our governments, have the internal security of our countries break down to a ridiculous piece of theater, have us live in fear, and have western society in general disrupted as much as possible.</p><p>The people attacking the US are smarter than us (they're probably engineers), and are not motivated by the primitive religious craziness that everyone seems to think. "Terrorism" (as this is now the concrete thing we're fighting) is a carefully planned tactic to disrupt western society, and not simply a plan to kill as many Americans as possible.</p><p>And they are, quite clearly, making some headway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those who attacked the US on 9/11 , and those who subsequently commit acts of terrorism against Americans are not trying to kill Americans.So many of the tactics being employed against terrorism are put in place because there is a widespread fear that " They 're out to kill us !
If we leave them alone , or if we do n't actively combat terrorism , more innocent American civilians will die .
" This is the wrong mindset , and the wrong problem to focus resources on .
The terrorists attacking the US are not out to kill Americans .
They do not want to " kill the infidels ! " .
They are opposed to the expansive , capitalist , commercialized society America is and represents .
They are opposed to " the Man " , as we like to say .
Our Man .
The westernized Man.By committing acts of terrorism , the attackers aim to weaken the unity of western society , disrupt our way of life , turn us against our governments , have the internal security of our countries break down to a ridiculous piece of theater , have us live in fear , and have western society in general disrupted as much as possible.The people attacking the US are smarter than us ( they 're probably engineers ) , and are not motivated by the primitive religious craziness that everyone seems to think .
" Terrorism " ( as this is now the concrete thing we 're fighting ) is a carefully planned tactic to disrupt western society , and not simply a plan to kill as many Americans as possible.And they are , quite clearly , making some headway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those who attacked the US on 9/11, and those who subsequently commit acts of terrorism against Americans are not trying to kill Americans.So many of the tactics being employed against terrorism are put in place because there is a widespread fear that "They're out to kill us!
If we leave them alone, or if we don't actively combat terrorism, more innocent American civilians will die.
"This is the wrong mindset, and the wrong problem to focus resources on.
The terrorists attacking the US are not out to kill Americans.
They do not want to "kill the infidels!".
They are opposed to the expansive, capitalist, commercialized society America is and represents.
They are opposed to "the Man", as we like to say.
Our Man.
The westernized Man.By committing acts of terrorism, the attackers aim to weaken the unity of western society, disrupt our way of life, turn us against our governments, have the internal security of our countries break down to a ridiculous piece of theater, have us live in fear, and have western society in general disrupted as much as possible.The people attacking the US are smarter than us (they're probably engineers), and are not motivated by the primitive religious craziness that everyone seems to think.
"Terrorism" (as this is now the concrete thing we're fighting) is a carefully planned tactic to disrupt western society, and not simply a plan to kill as many Americans as possible.And they are, quite clearly, making some headway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786870</id>
	<title>Re:So essentially...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263567180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We were invited by some.  We came, then we were asked to leave by virtually everyone (including the royal family which invited us there in the first place).  We have yet to leave...</p><p>If you want to go back to the real cause of this whole war on terror bs.  Look back to the Cold War.  The US trained foreign operatives (including Osama Bin Laden) to fight the Soviets.  We are GOOD at training people to kill and succeeded admirably.  Then, after everything was destroyed and people were starving, the Soviets left and so did we.  If we had actually helped the region it would now be a Mecca of US love, think Marshall plan after WWII.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We were invited by some .
We came , then we were asked to leave by virtually everyone ( including the royal family which invited us there in the first place ) .
We have yet to leave...If you want to go back to the real cause of this whole war on terror bs .
Look back to the Cold War .
The US trained foreign operatives ( including Osama Bin Laden ) to fight the Soviets .
We are GOOD at training people to kill and succeeded admirably .
Then , after everything was destroyed and people were starving , the Soviets left and so did we .
If we had actually helped the region it would now be a Mecca of US love , think Marshall plan after WWII .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We were invited by some.
We came, then we were asked to leave by virtually everyone (including the royal family which invited us there in the first place).
We have yet to leave...If you want to go back to the real cause of this whole war on terror bs.
Look back to the Cold War.
The US trained foreign operatives (including Osama Bin Laden) to fight the Soviets.
We are GOOD at training people to kill and succeeded admirably.
Then, after everything was destroyed and people were starving, the Soviets left and so did we.
If we had actually helped the region it would now be a Mecca of US love, think Marshall plan after WWII.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790314</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263657720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the US does in fact collect from the whole world. Issuing a world trade currency is nothing to laugh at. The US get their share just because they can print dollars. Industrial capacity is no more after being exported to China and any other country living off the borrowed money would fall to its knees long time ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the US does in fact collect from the whole world .
Issuing a world trade currency is nothing to laugh at .
The US get their share just because they can print dollars .
Industrial capacity is no more after being exported to China and any other country living off the borrowed money would fall to its knees long time ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the US does in fact collect from the whole world.
Issuing a world trade currency is nothing to laugh at.
The US get their share just because they can print dollars.
Industrial capacity is no more after being exported to China and any other country living off the borrowed money would fall to its knees long time ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890</id>
	<title>So essentially...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263560220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The people directing the operations believe them to be ineffective? It's all smoke and mirrors, and nothing is really safer? If something was going to happen, it still is, regardless of the measures implemented today? Who could have guess this to be the case?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The people directing the operations believe them to be ineffective ?
It 's all smoke and mirrors , and nothing is really safer ?
If something was going to happen , it still is , regardless of the measures implemented today ?
Who could have guess this to be the case ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The people directing the operations believe them to be ineffective?
It's all smoke and mirrors, and nothing is really safer?
If something was going to happen, it still is, regardless of the measures implemented today?
Who could have guess this to be the case?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788138</id>
	<title>Re:agree with the spirit, but some of the details.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263581280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure how to put this diplomatically. It sounds like you forgot about natural gas. Afghanistan has nothing to do with oil; it has everything to do with the natural gas under the Caspian. Why were we negotiating with the Taliban for access? Because we were VERY interested in the potential natural gas pipelines. But BTC etc -- they've not gone our way. We've spent billions, and our Caspian geopolitical outlook has not benefited.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how to put this diplomatically .
It sounds like you forgot about natural gas .
Afghanistan has nothing to do with oil ; it has everything to do with the natural gas under the Caspian .
Why were we negotiating with the Taliban for access ?
Because we were VERY interested in the potential natural gas pipelines .
But BTC etc -- they 've not gone our way .
We 've spent billions , and our Caspian geopolitical outlook has not benefited .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how to put this diplomatically.
It sounds like you forgot about natural gas.
Afghanistan has nothing to do with oil; it has everything to do with the natural gas under the Caspian.
Why were we negotiating with the Taliban for access?
Because we were VERY interested in the potential natural gas pipelines.
But BTC etc -- they've not gone our way.
We've spent billions, and our Caspian geopolitical outlook has not benefited.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788204</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263582420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ugh, why do rednecks think US is the reason countries like Japan and Germany are successful? It takes away all credit from the people of those countries who worked so hard to achieve success. Those countries were ALWAYS industrious. Where are your success stories about countries that were always shitty, like Iraq and Afghanistan?

Oh wait, you did mention Afghanistan, and their great quality of life that US brought along with them. Did you mean like suicide bombers at the market, destroyed infrastructure, weddings broken up by unmanned drones, and murdering of civilians who are protesting US occupation? Those are some truly progressive changes.

I don't know why you're flaunting Israel at all. They are practically the sole reason why the whole world hates us. Israel's economy is better than their neighbors'? Well, with the amount of money their lobby steals from corrupt US politicians, it better be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ugh , why do rednecks think US is the reason countries like Japan and Germany are successful ?
It takes away all credit from the people of those countries who worked so hard to achieve success .
Those countries were ALWAYS industrious .
Where are your success stories about countries that were always shitty , like Iraq and Afghanistan ?
Oh wait , you did mention Afghanistan , and their great quality of life that US brought along with them .
Did you mean like suicide bombers at the market , destroyed infrastructure , weddings broken up by unmanned drones , and murdering of civilians who are protesting US occupation ?
Those are some truly progressive changes .
I do n't know why you 're flaunting Israel at all .
They are practically the sole reason why the whole world hates us .
Israel 's economy is better than their neighbors ' ?
Well , with the amount of money their lobby steals from corrupt US politicians , it better be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ugh, why do rednecks think US is the reason countries like Japan and Germany are successful?
It takes away all credit from the people of those countries who worked so hard to achieve success.
Those countries were ALWAYS industrious.
Where are your success stories about countries that were always shitty, like Iraq and Afghanistan?
Oh wait, you did mention Afghanistan, and their great quality of life that US brought along with them.
Did you mean like suicide bombers at the market, destroyed infrastructure, weddings broken up by unmanned drones, and murdering of civilians who are protesting US occupation?
Those are some truly progressive changes.
I don't know why you're flaunting Israel at all.
They are practically the sole reason why the whole world hates us.
Israel's economy is better than their neighbors'?
Well, with the amount of money their lobby steals from corrupt US politicians, it better be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787270</id>
	<title>Re:agree with the spirit, but some of the details.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263571560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi<br>What are you missing?</p><p>Afghanistan: before 2001 prospectives said that there was a lot of oil there. It was an error, but not important because Afghanistan will control lot of the energy pipelines going to China. You know China is very important, yes?</p><p>Iraq: it IMHO was meant to be a part of America, if not in the Constitution, but in the oil resources. Corporate America wanted to be there, and it wasn't possible with Saddam. Now they have exclusive rights.</p><p>I am not trolling. Was you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HiWhat are you missing ? Afghanistan : before 2001 prospectives said that there was a lot of oil there .
It was an error , but not important because Afghanistan will control lot of the energy pipelines going to China .
You know China is very important , yes ? Iraq : it IMHO was meant to be a part of America , if not in the Constitution , but in the oil resources .
Corporate America wanted to be there , and it was n't possible with Saddam .
Now they have exclusive rights.I am not trolling .
Was you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HiWhat are you missing?Afghanistan: before 2001 prospectives said that there was a lot of oil there.
It was an error, but not important because Afghanistan will control lot of the energy pipelines going to China.
You know China is very important, yes?Iraq: it IMHO was meant to be a part of America, if not in the Constitution, but in the oil resources.
Corporate America wanted to be there, and it wasn't possible with Saddam.
Now they have exclusive rights.I am not trolling.
Was you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790670</id>
	<title>The magic words are: "YOU'RE FIRED."</title>
	<author>Hasai</author>
	<datestamp>1263660780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honest. That's it.</p><p>Nobody in a government bureaucracy ever gets fired, no matter how much they screw-up. So, when the pundits and the politicians huff and puff, all the bureaucrats do is roll their eyes and go back to business as usual.</p><p>Go all the way down the chain of the command, and FIRE every single person who touched this mess. Only then will you get the bureaucrats' attention.</p><p>'Nuff said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honest .
That 's it.Nobody in a government bureaucracy ever gets fired , no matter how much they screw-up .
So , when the pundits and the politicians huff and puff , all the bureaucrats do is roll their eyes and go back to business as usual.Go all the way down the chain of the command , and FIRE every single person who touched this mess .
Only then will you get the bureaucrats ' attention .
'Nuff said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honest.
That's it.Nobody in a government bureaucracy ever gets fired, no matter how much they screw-up.
So, when the pundits and the politicians huff and puff, all the bureaucrats do is roll their eyes and go back to business as usual.Go all the way down the chain of the command, and FIRE every single person who touched this mess.
Only then will you get the bureaucrats' attention.
'Nuff said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789178</id>
	<title>Intelligence "failures"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263643080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So 19 amateur pilots, armed with razor blades, were able to destroy two of the world's largest buildings and attack the Pentagon?  The alleged hijackers were also commanded by a man in a cave in Afghanistan who was on dialysis. The World Trade Center towers collapsed at near free fall speed, into their own footprint. That can only happen with controlled demolition. Have you seen the BBC video, where the collapse of World Trade Center Building Seven was announced 20 minutes before it happened? Did you know that no steel framed building has collapsed due to fie, other than the ones on 9/11? How could NORAD mange to fail to reach the Pentagon plane, when it was struck 34 minutes after  the second World Trade Center Tower was struck?</p><p>The leaders of the 9/11 Truth Movement should not be trusted, either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So 19 amateur pilots , armed with razor blades , were able to destroy two of the world 's largest buildings and attack the Pentagon ?
The alleged hijackers were also commanded by a man in a cave in Afghanistan who was on dialysis .
The World Trade Center towers collapsed at near free fall speed , into their own footprint .
That can only happen with controlled demolition .
Have you seen the BBC video , where the collapse of World Trade Center Building Seven was announced 20 minutes before it happened ?
Did you know that no steel framed building has collapsed due to fie , other than the ones on 9/11 ?
How could NORAD mange to fail to reach the Pentagon plane , when it was struck 34 minutes after the second World Trade Center Tower was struck ? The leaders of the 9/11 Truth Movement should not be trusted , either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So 19 amateur pilots, armed with razor blades, were able to destroy two of the world's largest buildings and attack the Pentagon?
The alleged hijackers were also commanded by a man in a cave in Afghanistan who was on dialysis.
The World Trade Center towers collapsed at near free fall speed, into their own footprint.
That can only happen with controlled demolition.
Have you seen the BBC video, where the collapse of World Trade Center Building Seven was announced 20 minutes before it happened?
Did you know that no steel framed building has collapsed due to fie, other than the ones on 9/11?
How could NORAD mange to fail to reach the Pentagon plane, when it was struck 34 minutes after  the second World Trade Center Tower was struck?The leaders of the 9/11 Truth Movement should not be trusted, either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787640</id>
	<title>The CTs have just had to save for a few rounds.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263576000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now they have money for AWPs and M4s.  Rush mid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now they have money for AWPs and M4s .
Rush mid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now they have money for AWPs and M4s.
Rush mid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786428</id>
	<title>Copyright police</title>
	<author>greenbird</author>
	<datestamp>1263564120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the FBI and CIA are wasting huge resources tracking down and chasing CD and DVD counterfeiters acting as the private police for a group of corporations who have convinced the governments of the world, through extensive bribes, that they're obsolete business models are vital to the modern world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the FBI and CIA are wasting huge resources tracking down and chasing CD and DVD counterfeiters acting as the private police for a group of corporations who have convinced the governments of the world , through extensive bribes , that they 're obsolete business models are vital to the modern world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the FBI and CIA are wasting huge resources tracking down and chasing CD and DVD counterfeiters acting as the private police for a group of corporations who have convinced the governments of the world, through extensive bribes, that they're obsolete business models are vital to the modern world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786496</id>
	<title>We should stop maintaining the world order</title>
	<author>qqi239</author>
	<datestamp>1263564540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>just let them do what they want, namely, kill each other, we simply cannot put an American MP on every crossroad of the world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>just let them do what they want , namely , kill each other , we simply can not put an American MP on every crossroad of the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just let them do what they want, namely, kill each other, we simply cannot put an American MP on every crossroad of the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30817628</id>
	<title>Re:agree with the spirit, but some of the details.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263900960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may remember the backlash when the USA pushed a puppet government in Iraq?</p><p>You may remember the pipeline going through Afganistan, for oil?</p><p>The obvious solution to the Isreal problem is to make them not abuse justice.</p><p>How many Palestinians die for every Isreli? 1000?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may remember the backlash when the USA pushed a puppet government in Iraq ? You may remember the pipeline going through Afganistan , for oil ? The obvious solution to the Isreal problem is to make them not abuse justice.How many Palestinians die for every Isreli ?
1000 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may remember the backlash when the USA pushed a puppet government in Iraq?You may remember the pipeline going through Afganistan, for oil?The obvious solution to the Isreal problem is to make them not abuse justice.How many Palestinians die for every Isreli?
1000?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787892</id>
	<title>Why the Truth is True</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1263578520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, what a summary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , what a summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, what a summary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786650</id>
	<title>Re:Many will say that I'm trolling, but ...</title>
	<author>omar.sahal</author>
	<datestamp>1263565680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>religious fanatics verses self serving and knee jerk reaction, in my opion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>religious fanatics verses self serving and knee jerk reaction , in my opion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>religious fanatics verses self serving and knee jerk reaction, in my opion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30817628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30796684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_2041202_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788432
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788678
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30785890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786146
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786870
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786884
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786692
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786578
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786772
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30796684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30817628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786490
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787024
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790314
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789286
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30790566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30789176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30788456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786970
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_2041202.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30786496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_2041202.30787038
</commentlist>
</conversation>
