<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_23_0230224</id>
	<title>Radio Hams Fired Upon In Haiti</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1264271220000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:bruce@perenBALDWINs.comminusauthor" rel="nofollow">Bruce Perens</a> writes <i>"A team of radio ham volunteers from the Dominican Republic visited Port-au-Prince to install VHF repeaters, <a href="http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/01/18/11293/">only to be fired upon as they left the Dominican embassy</a>. Two non-ham members of the party were hit, one severely. ARRL is <a href="http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/01/22/11304/">sending equipment</a>, and there is confusion as unfamiliar operators in <a href="http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2010/01/22/11303/">government agencies join in on ham frequencies</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bruce Perens writes " A team of radio ham volunteers from the Dominican Republic visited Port-au-Prince to install VHF repeaters , only to be fired upon as they left the Dominican embassy .
Two non-ham members of the party were hit , one severely .
ARRL is sending equipment , and there is confusion as unfamiliar operators in government agencies join in on ham frequencies .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bruce Perens writes "A team of radio ham volunteers from the Dominican Republic visited Port-au-Prince to install VHF repeaters, only to be fired upon as they left the Dominican embassy.
Two non-ham members of the party were hit, one severely.
ARRL is sending equipment, and there is confusion as unfamiliar operators in government agencies join in on ham frequencies.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867608</id>
	<title>Re:Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>ChromeAeonium</author>
	<datestamp>1264276920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can see where you're coming from a bit, but the flaw in that though is that they're not mutually exclusive actions.  Of all the money the government spends, aid to disaster victims ranks among the worthwhile expenditures.  Don't complain about this taking money from natives who need it; complain about the billions pissed away on much stupider things (bailouts, wars, drug prohibition, ect.) sucking up all the money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see where you 're coming from a bit , but the flaw in that though is that they 're not mutually exclusive actions .
Of all the money the government spends , aid to disaster victims ranks among the worthwhile expenditures .
Do n't complain about this taking money from natives who need it ; complain about the billions pissed away on much stupider things ( bailouts , wars , drug prohibition , ect .
) sucking up all the money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see where you're coming from a bit, but the flaw in that though is that they're not mutually exclusive actions.
Of all the money the government spends, aid to disaster victims ranks among the worthwhile expenditures.
Don't complain about this taking money from natives who need it; complain about the billions pissed away on much stupider things (bailouts, wars, drug prohibition, ect.
) sucking up all the money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868652</id>
	<title>Somalia?</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1264251000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't count on it.
</p><p>And would the US want to pay the bill? With what exactly?
</p><p>And it the US and other western nations that have bled Haiti dry with loans they want repaid. The west is a loanshark. Stop that practice and poor countries would be helped far more as they could actually spend any earned money on developing their country rather then paying of endless debts. haiti was going backrupt just paying the intrest on its loans alone, not even able to actually pay them off. A perputual money machine for the west.
</p><p>Oh and since the US has homeless people, can it be overtaken as well for not being able to provide? Wonder who would want that job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't count on it .
And would the US want to pay the bill ?
With what exactly ?
And it the US and other western nations that have bled Haiti dry with loans they want repaid .
The west is a loanshark .
Stop that practice and poor countries would be helped far more as they could actually spend any earned money on developing their country rather then paying of endless debts .
haiti was going backrupt just paying the intrest on its loans alone , not even able to actually pay them off .
A perputual money machine for the west .
Oh and since the US has homeless people , can it be overtaken as well for not being able to provide ?
Wonder who would want that job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't count on it.
And would the US want to pay the bill?
With what exactly?
And it the US and other western nations that have bled Haiti dry with loans they want repaid.
The west is a loanshark.
Stop that practice and poor countries would be helped far more as they could actually spend any earned money on developing their country rather then paying of endless debts.
haiti was going backrupt just paying the intrest on its loans alone, not even able to actually pay them off.
A perputual money machine for the west.
Oh and since the US has homeless people, can it be overtaken as well for not being able to provide?
Wonder who would want that job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30899964</id>
	<title>Quick!  Send in Bono!</title>
	<author>ALeader71</author>
	<datestamp>1264438080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The earthquake in Haiti is horrible.  The human cost, unimaginable.  Decades of corruption, slavery, and exploitation by the larger Caribean powers (which includes the U.S.) has left this nation in ruins.  This article is hardly surprising, given the level of anarchy.  The efforts of the Amerture Radio community are admirable and quite brave.  The Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, etc are doing amazing things in dangerous conditions.  I fully support all legitimate efforts to assist this nation's rebuilding efforts except for one area.</p><p>
Some call for cancelling Haiti's debt:<br>
<a href="http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/01/13/cancel\_haitis\_debt" title="foreignpolicy.com" rel="nofollow">Cancel Haiti's debt</a> [foreignpolicy.com] <br>
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/world/americas/20debt.html" title="nytimes.com" rel="nofollow">Rich Nations Call for Haiti Debt Relief</a> [nytimes.com]</p><p>You cannot cancel Haiti's debt without reforming this badly broken nation's government, police force, military, beaurocracy, and schools.</p><p>
This should be the 21st Century's first rebuilding effort by Western World.  Think of it as the continuation and modernization of the Monore Doctrine.  Accept help from the rest of the world, but start treating these failed/failing states in the New World as part of a larger neighborhood.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The earthquake in Haiti is horrible .
The human cost , unimaginable .
Decades of corruption , slavery , and exploitation by the larger Caribean powers ( which includes the U.S. ) has left this nation in ruins .
This article is hardly surprising , given the level of anarchy .
The efforts of the Amerture Radio community are admirable and quite brave .
The Red Cross , Doctors Without Borders , etc are doing amazing things in dangerous conditions .
I fully support all legitimate efforts to assist this nation 's rebuilding efforts except for one area .
Some call for cancelling Haiti 's debt : Cancel Haiti 's debt [ foreignpolicy.com ] Rich Nations Call for Haiti Debt Relief [ nytimes.com ] You can not cancel Haiti 's debt without reforming this badly broken nation 's government , police force , military , beaurocracy , and schools .
This should be the 21st Century 's first rebuilding effort by Western World .
Think of it as the continuation and modernization of the Monore Doctrine .
Accept help from the rest of the world , but start treating these failed/failing states in the New World as part of a larger neighborhood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The earthquake in Haiti is horrible.
The human cost, unimaginable.
Decades of corruption, slavery, and exploitation by the larger Caribean powers (which includes the U.S.) has left this nation in ruins.
This article is hardly surprising, given the level of anarchy.
The efforts of the Amerture Radio community are admirable and quite brave.
The Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, etc are doing amazing things in dangerous conditions.
I fully support all legitimate efforts to assist this nation's rebuilding efforts except for one area.
Some call for cancelling Haiti's debt:
Cancel Haiti's debt [foreignpolicy.com] 
Rich Nations Call for Haiti Debt Relief [nytimes.com]You cannot cancel Haiti's debt without reforming this badly broken nation's government, police force, military, beaurocracy, and schools.
This should be the 21st Century's first rebuilding effort by Western World.
Think of it as the continuation and modernization of the Monore Doctrine.
Accept help from the rest of the world, but start treating these failed/failing states in the New World as part of a larger neighborhood.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868292</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>troll8901</author>
	<datestamp>1264245180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's rather arrogant of you.</p></div><p>Even *I* can't troll like this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's rather arrogant of you.Even * I * ca n't troll like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's rather arrogant of you.Even *I* can't troll like this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868306</id>
	<title>In their excuse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264245300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In their excuse, there is apparently a food shortage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In their excuse , there is apparently a food shortage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In their excuse, there is apparently a food shortage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868680</id>
	<title>interesting frequencies to listen to</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1264251480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>14.265 &amp; 14,300 both on the upperside SSB

i been listening to them since the quake hit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>14.265 &amp; 14,300 both on the upperside SSB i been listening to them since the quake hit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>14.265 &amp; 14,300 both on the upperside SSB

i been listening to them since the quake hit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874640</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you for this information.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264258980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip, duck under the water and they will let go quickly."<br> <br>

Now I know that if the lifeguard trying to save me starts to drown/sink... they're just faking.  Better to hang on tight, knowing they will soon surface for air.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip , duck under the water and they will let go quickly .
" Now I know that if the lifeguard trying to save me starts to drown/sink... they 're just faking .
Better to hang on tight , knowing they will soon surface for air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip, duck under the water and they will let go quickly.
" 

Now I know that if the lifeguard trying to save me starts to drown/sink... they're just faking.
Better to hang on tight, knowing they will soon surface for air.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868922</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Hugo Chavez</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264254420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>This would be one of the reasons why we're sending our military.</i></p><p>All the US military can do is plan for invasion and occupation of countries. That is what they do. They are executing a pre-planned invasion scheme. Sometimes the reason for invasion has to be created (e.g. WMD/Bad Guys), sometimes a reason just comes along.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be one of the reasons why we 're sending our military.All the US military can do is plan for invasion and occupation of countries .
That is what they do .
They are executing a pre-planned invasion scheme .
Sometimes the reason for invasion has to be created ( e.g .
WMD/Bad Guys ) , sometimes a reason just comes along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be one of the reasons why we're sending our military.All the US military can do is plan for invasion and occupation of countries.
That is what they do.
They are executing a pre-planned invasion scheme.
Sometimes the reason for invasion has to be created (e.g.
WMD/Bad Guys), sometimes a reason just comes along.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867696</id>
	<title>Re:Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1264278180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uhm, this might be not simple targeting of random aid workers (or aid workers coming from your country, with which you seem to have biggest potential problem...), but specifically those coming from Dominican Republic. Some Haitians might feel antipathy towards them...</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsley\_Massacre" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsley\_Massacre</a> [wikipedia.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antihaitianismo" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antihaitianismo</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uhm , this might be not simple targeting of random aid workers ( or aid workers coming from your country , with which you seem to have biggest potential problem... ) , but specifically those coming from Dominican Republic .
Some Haitians might feel antipathy towards them...http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsley \ _Massacre [ wikipedia.org ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antihaitianismo [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uhm, this might be not simple targeting of random aid workers (or aid workers coming from your country, with which you seem to have biggest potential problem...), but specifically those coming from Dominican Republic.
Some Haitians might feel antipathy towards them...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsley\_Massacre [wikipedia.org]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antihaitianismo [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868176</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Hugo Chavez</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264243200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wtf Hugo Chavez has to do here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wtf Hugo Chavez has to do here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wtf Hugo Chavez has to do here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1264189140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has nothing to do with ham radio operators being targetted... I doubt they even knew (or cared) that the vehicles were filled with communication equipment.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If there's no law enforcement left, just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands?</p></div><p>The "right hands"? That's rather arrogant of you. If your city was just washed away or blown to bits, and there's tens of thousands of people roaming the streets looking for food, medical supplies, or anything useful and there's not a uniform in sight, what do you think happens after a few days and people start to get hungry and desperate basic essentials like clean water? In the middle of that, you've got a vehicle (maybe the first you've seen in days or weeks) with well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you're going to have is? <i>Fuck! That's dinner. Get the gun.</i></p><p>Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford. It's like when you've got a person who's gone overboard and they're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever <i>ever</i> do is jump in after them. That's a nice hollywood touch, but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that's floating that comes near it -- which includes you. Then you'll both drown. Better to throw them the rope and let them save themselves. Maybe that's callous, but again -- your morality could get you (and others) killed. As such, it's a luxury in a crisis (at best).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has nothing to do with ham radio operators being targetted... I doubt they even knew ( or cared ) that the vehicles were filled with communication equipment.If there 's no law enforcement left , just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands ? The " right hands " ?
That 's rather arrogant of you .
If your city was just washed away or blown to bits , and there 's tens of thousands of people roaming the streets looking for food , medical supplies , or anything useful and there 's not a uniform in sight , what do you think happens after a few days and people start to get hungry and desperate basic essentials like clean water ?
In the middle of that , you 've got a vehicle ( maybe the first you 've seen in days or weeks ) with well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you 're going to have is ?
Fuck ! That 's dinner .
Get the gun.Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford .
It 's like when you 've got a person who 's gone overboard and they 're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them .
That 's a nice hollywood touch , but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that 's floating that comes near it -- which includes you .
Then you 'll both drown .
Better to throw them the rope and let them save themselves .
Maybe that 's callous , but again -- your morality could get you ( and others ) killed .
As such , it 's a luxury in a crisis ( at best ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has nothing to do with ham radio operators being targetted... I doubt they even knew (or cared) that the vehicles were filled with communication equipment.If there's no law enforcement left, just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands?The "right hands"?
That's rather arrogant of you.
If your city was just washed away or blown to bits, and there's tens of thousands of people roaming the streets looking for food, medical supplies, or anything useful and there's not a uniform in sight, what do you think happens after a few days and people start to get hungry and desperate basic essentials like clean water?
In the middle of that, you've got a vehicle (maybe the first you've seen in days or weeks) with well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you're going to have is?
Fuck! That's dinner.
Get the gun.Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford.
It's like when you've got a person who's gone overboard and they're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them.
That's a nice hollywood touch, but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that's floating that comes near it -- which includes you.
Then you'll both drown.
Better to throw them the rope and let them save themselves.
Maybe that's callous, but again -- your morality could get you (and others) killed.
As such, it's a luxury in a crisis (at best).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867750</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264278780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The "right hands"? That's rather arrogant of you.</p></div><p>And it's rather ignorant of you.  In situations like this in developing nations, warlords (or gangs or whatever they are in the current country) often hijack the emergency supplies and try to sell them, give them to their friends, or even dump them.  If you are bringing aid to an under-developed country, this is definitely something you want to think about. Furthermore when people go hungry, they don't get violent, they get lethargic.  Try skipping food for a few days yourself, and see how many faces you want to bash in.  No, these people doing the shooting have been stealing enough food all along, and are well fed.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It's like when you've got a person who's gone overboard and they're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them. That's a nice hollywood touch, but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that's floating that comes near it -- which includes you.</p></div><p>And it looks like you learned your life-saving skills from Hollywood or some other unreliable source.  If you can't throw a rope or something to the person, then you swim up behind them, hold them against your body with your arm around their neck, and sidestroke back to shore.  If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip, duck under the water and they will let go quickly.  If my kid, or friend, or even random stranger is out there drowning and I have nothing to throw, you can believe I will go in after him.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The " right hands " ?
That 's rather arrogant of you.And it 's rather ignorant of you .
In situations like this in developing nations , warlords ( or gangs or whatever they are in the current country ) often hijack the emergency supplies and try to sell them , give them to their friends , or even dump them .
If you are bringing aid to an under-developed country , this is definitely something you want to think about .
Furthermore when people go hungry , they do n't get violent , they get lethargic .
Try skipping food for a few days yourself , and see how many faces you want to bash in .
No , these people doing the shooting have been stealing enough food all along , and are well fed.It 's like when you 've got a person who 's gone overboard and they 're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them .
That 's a nice hollywood touch , but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that 's floating that comes near it -- which includes you.And it looks like you learned your life-saving skills from Hollywood or some other unreliable source .
If you ca n't throw a rope or something to the person , then you swim up behind them , hold them against your body with your arm around their neck , and sidestroke back to shore .
If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip , duck under the water and they will let go quickly .
If my kid , or friend , or even random stranger is out there drowning and I have nothing to throw , you can believe I will go in after him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "right hands"?
That's rather arrogant of you.And it's rather ignorant of you.
In situations like this in developing nations, warlords (or gangs or whatever they are in the current country) often hijack the emergency supplies and try to sell them, give them to their friends, or even dump them.
If you are bringing aid to an under-developed country, this is definitely something you want to think about.
Furthermore when people go hungry, they don't get violent, they get lethargic.
Try skipping food for a few days yourself, and see how many faces you want to bash in.
No, these people doing the shooting have been stealing enough food all along, and are well fed.It's like when you've got a person who's gone overboard and they're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them.
That's a nice hollywood touch, but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that's floating that comes near it -- which includes you.And it looks like you learned your life-saving skills from Hollywood or some other unreliable source.
If you can't throw a rope or something to the person, then you swim up behind them, hold them against your body with your arm around their neck, and sidestroke back to shore.
If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip, duck under the water and they will let go quickly.
If my kid, or friend, or even random stranger is out there drowning and I have nothing to throw, you can believe I will go in after him.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867686</id>
	<title>They should</title>
	<author>JustOK</author>
	<datestamp>1264278000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they'd just use BPL in Haiti, then HAM wouldn't work and there would not be problems like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 'd just use BPL in Haiti , then HAM would n't work and there would not be problems like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they'd just use BPL in Haiti, then HAM wouldn't work and there would not be problems like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868230</id>
	<title>Lose sovereignty, gain humanity?</title>
	<author>mykos</author>
	<datestamp>1264244100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't someone just take Haiti? Surely conquerors showing up with promises of food and infrastructure building would be preferred to their current government.</p><p>A government which lacks the power to govern also lacks the right to do the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't someone just take Haiti ?
Surely conquerors showing up with promises of food and infrastructure building would be preferred to their current government.A government which lacks the power to govern also lacks the right to do the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't someone just take Haiti?
Surely conquerors showing up with promises of food and infrastructure building would be preferred to their current government.A government which lacks the power to govern also lacks the right to do the same.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868360</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Hugo Chavez</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264246140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just too bad that all other reasons are wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just too bad that all other reasons are wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just too bad that all other reasons are wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868058</id>
	<title>Iridium</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264240680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not putting anyone down but it does seem that
in an era of satellite phones like Iridium
the HF ham radio op are not so relevant.

What the folks on the ground need is
safety, food &amp; water and sanitation.
Haiti was dirt poor to start with and many
were lacking these essentials.
Unless the USA wants its own Little Somalia
on its door step, the Haitians will start Hijacking
shipping in the caribbean, the USA just gotta send the troops in. At least the Haitian will
have more respect for the GI's than Iraq and
Afgan peoples.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not putting anyone down but it does seem that in an era of satellite phones like Iridium the HF ham radio op are not so relevant .
What the folks on the ground need is safety , food &amp; water and sanitation .
Haiti was dirt poor to start with and many were lacking these essentials .
Unless the USA wants its own Little Somalia on its door step , the Haitians will start Hijacking shipping in the caribbean , the USA just got ta send the troops in .
At least the Haitian will have more respect for the GI 's than Iraq and Afgan peoples .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not putting anyone down but it does seem that
in an era of satellite phones like Iridium
the HF ham radio op are not so relevant.
What the folks on the ground need is
safety, food &amp; water and sanitation.
Haiti was dirt poor to start with and many
were lacking these essentials.
Unless the USA wants its own Little Somalia
on its door step, the Haitians will start Hijacking
shipping in the caribbean, the USA just gotta send the troops in.
At least the Haitian will
have more respect for the GI's than Iraq and
Afgan peoples.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868426</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264247100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In the middle of that, you've got a vehicle (maybe the first you've seen in days or weeks) with well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you're going to have is? <em>Fuck! That's dinner. Get the gun.</em> </p><p>How strange. My first tought was: "<em>These people are bringing me dinner. Help them so they can bring more.</em>".</p><blockquote><div><p>Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford.</p></div> </blockquote><p>That keeps repeated often, yet it's absolute rubbish. "Morality" in humans is an evolved trait, which means that it <em>helps</em>, rather than hinders, survival. For example, by shooting at ham operators or looting supply colons, the perpetrators of these acts make it harder to get help to the area, therefore increasing the chances that they themselves starve to death (or are shot by guards).</p><blockquote><div><p>It's like when you've got a person who's gone overboard and they're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them. That's a nice hollywood touch, but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that's floating that comes near it -- which includes you. Then you'll both drown.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Thank you for refuting your own point: panicking in a tough spot gets you killed. Extra points for choosing an example where simply staying still for a few seconds is sufficient to avoid death (human bodies float).</p><blockquote><div><p>Better to throw them the rope and let them save themselves. Maybe that's callous, but again -- your morality could get you (and others) killed. As such, it's a luxury in a crisis (at best).</p></div> </blockquote><p>No, it's not callous, it's common sense, just like it's common sense to not shoot at people who are trying to bring food and water to you. The areas where people can fight off their reptile brain and stay calm and orderly usually fair fine after a disaster, and start recovering immediately as help floods in with no need to waste resources to enforce order; the ones where people resort to looting continue deteroriating until either order is restored through force or there's insufficient population left to continue fighting.</p><p>Morality is not a luxury, it's a case of prisoner's dilemma: not looting supply colonies increases your chances of survival <em>as long as others leave them alone as well</em>. That's why empathy evolved, and that's why this idiotic believe that "everything goes in a crisis" is so dangerous and self-defeating.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the middle of that , you 've got a vehicle ( maybe the first you 've seen in days or weeks ) with well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you 're going to have is ?
Fuck ! That 's dinner .
Get the gun .
How strange .
My first tought was : " These people are bringing me dinner .
Help them so they can bring more .
" .Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford .
That keeps repeated often , yet it 's absolute rubbish .
" Morality " in humans is an evolved trait , which means that it helps , rather than hinders , survival .
For example , by shooting at ham operators or looting supply colons , the perpetrators of these acts make it harder to get help to the area , therefore increasing the chances that they themselves starve to death ( or are shot by guards ) .It 's like when you 've got a person who 's gone overboard and they 're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them .
That 's a nice hollywood touch , but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that 's floating that comes near it -- which includes you .
Then you 'll both drown .
Thank you for refuting your own point : panicking in a tough spot gets you killed .
Extra points for choosing an example where simply staying still for a few seconds is sufficient to avoid death ( human bodies float ) .Better to throw them the rope and let them save themselves .
Maybe that 's callous , but again -- your morality could get you ( and others ) killed .
As such , it 's a luxury in a crisis ( at best ) .
No , it 's not callous , it 's common sense , just like it 's common sense to not shoot at people who are trying to bring food and water to you .
The areas where people can fight off their reptile brain and stay calm and orderly usually fair fine after a disaster , and start recovering immediately as help floods in with no need to waste resources to enforce order ; the ones where people resort to looting continue deteroriating until either order is restored through force or there 's insufficient population left to continue fighting.Morality is not a luxury , it 's a case of prisoner 's dilemma : not looting supply colonies increases your chances of survival as long as others leave them alone as well .
That 's why empathy evolved , and that 's why this idiotic believe that " everything goes in a crisis " is so dangerous and self-defeating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the middle of that, you've got a vehicle (maybe the first you've seen in days or weeks) with well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you're going to have is?
Fuck! That's dinner.
Get the gun.
How strange.
My first tought was: "These people are bringing me dinner.
Help them so they can bring more.
".Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford.
That keeps repeated often, yet it's absolute rubbish.
"Morality" in humans is an evolved trait, which means that it helps, rather than hinders, survival.
For example, by shooting at ham operators or looting supply colons, the perpetrators of these acts make it harder to get help to the area, therefore increasing the chances that they themselves starve to death (or are shot by guards).It's like when you've got a person who's gone overboard and they're struggling to stay afloat -- the one thing you never ever ever do is jump in after them.
That's a nice hollywood touch, but in the real world that person is desperate and will octopus-death-grip anything that's floating that comes near it -- which includes you.
Then you'll both drown.
Thank you for refuting your own point: panicking in a tough spot gets you killed.
Extra points for choosing an example where simply staying still for a few seconds is sufficient to avoid death (human bodies float).Better to throw them the rope and let them save themselves.
Maybe that's callous, but again -- your morality could get you (and others) killed.
As such, it's a luxury in a crisis (at best).
No, it's not callous, it's common sense, just like it's common sense to not shoot at people who are trying to bring food and water to you.
The areas where people can fight off their reptile brain and stay calm and orderly usually fair fine after a disaster, and start recovering immediately as help floods in with no need to waste resources to enforce order; the ones where people resort to looting continue deteroriating until either order is restored through force or there's insufficient population left to continue fighting.Morality is not a luxury, it's a case of prisoner's dilemma: not looting supply colonies increases your chances of survival as long as others leave them alone as well.
That's why empathy evolved, and that's why this idiotic believe that "everything goes in a crisis" is so dangerous and self-defeating.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867858</id>
	<title>Not buying it!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264237620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anyone have this from any REAL news source and not the ham radio operator political lobbying group? No? Nobody? I didn't think so.<br>
This never happened.<br>
There is nothing ham radio operators can do that trained professional radio operators with professional equipment cannot do better, faster, and more reliably.<br>
They know it and will stop at nothing to save their fantasy world from reality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone have this from any REAL news source and not the ham radio operator political lobbying group ?
No ? Nobody ?
I did n't think so .
This never happened .
There is nothing ham radio operators can do that trained professional radio operators with professional equipment can not do better , faster , and more reliably .
They know it and will stop at nothing to save their fantasy world from reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone have this from any REAL news source and not the ham radio operator political lobbying group?
No? Nobody?
I didn't think so.
This never happened.
There is nothing ham radio operators can do that trained professional radio operators with professional equipment cannot do better, faster, and more reliably.
They know it and will stop at nothing to save their fantasy world from reality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867680</id>
	<title>Re:Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264278000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, let them sink.  Who cares about a bunch of bootlipped, nappy-headed spook savages.  Let's get onto more pressing issues, like who is going to host the Tonight Show this week.</p><p>--Anonymous Coward, providing Slashdot with valuable racism since 199X</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , let them sink .
Who cares about a bunch of bootlipped , nappy-headed spook savages .
Let 's get onto more pressing issues , like who is going to host the Tonight Show this week.--Anonymous Coward , providing Slashdot with valuable racism since 199X</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, let them sink.
Who cares about a bunch of bootlipped, nappy-headed spook savages.
Let's get onto more pressing issues, like who is going to host the Tonight Show this week.--Anonymous Coward, providing Slashdot with valuable racism since 199X</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30871146</id>
	<title>Re:In their excuse</title>
	<author>6Yankee</author>
	<datestamp>1264275180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haitian 1: Hey, those guys have ham<br>Haitian 2: clickclickBANGBANG<br>Haitian 1: *facepalm* radios. Ham <b>radios.</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Haitian 1 : Hey , those guys have hamHaitian 2 : clickclickBANGBANGHaitian 1 : * facepalm * radios .
Ham radios .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haitian 1: Hey, those guys have hamHaitian 2: clickclickBANGBANGHaitian 1: *facepalm* radios.
Ham radios.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870786</id>
	<title>internet through HAM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264272120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've heard that there are many different ways of getting internet and/or e-mail access through HAM. one example would be packet radio but that is slow I think and there are newer ways with faster speeds. has this been deployed during disasters at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've heard that there are many different ways of getting internet and/or e-mail access through HAM .
one example would be packet radio but that is slow I think and there are newer ways with faster speeds .
has this been deployed during disasters at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've heard that there are many different ways of getting internet and/or e-mail access through HAM.
one example would be packet radio but that is slow I think and there are newer ways with faster speeds.
has this been deployed during disasters at all?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869260</id>
	<title>Priorities changed since 9/11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264258380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ever since, natural disasters are treated as terrorist attacks: "security" is more important than helping victims. Remember Katerina/NOLA.</p><p><b>Security Red Zones in Haiti Preventing Large Aid Groups from Effectively Distributing Aid</b><br><a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/22/security\_red\_zones\_in\_haiti\_preventing" title="democracynow.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/22/security\_red\_zones\_in\_haiti\_preventing</a> [democracynow.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever since , natural disasters are treated as terrorist attacks : " security " is more important than helping victims .
Remember Katerina/NOLA.Security Red Zones in Haiti Preventing Large Aid Groups from Effectively Distributing Aidhttp : //www.democracynow.org/2010/1/22/security \ _red \ _zones \ _in \ _haiti \ _preventing [ democracynow.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever since, natural disasters are treated as terrorist attacks: "security" is more important than helping victims.
Remember Katerina/NOLA.Security Red Zones in Haiti Preventing Large Aid Groups from Effectively Distributing Aidhttp://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/22/security\_red\_zones\_in\_haiti\_preventing [democracynow.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30872770</id>
	<title>This Just In . . .</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1264243140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Massive Thread Drift Fosters Occasionally Insightful Morality/Spelling Debate Amongst 14-year-old Slashdotters.</p><p>Surprisingly, Haiti Remains in Need of Assistance; Radio Operators Still Shot.</p><p>Godwin's Law Invoked at 11.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Massive Thread Drift Fosters Occasionally Insightful Morality/Spelling Debate Amongst 14-year-old Slashdotters.Surprisingly , Haiti Remains in Need of Assistance ; Radio Operators Still Shot.Godwin 's Law Invoked at 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Massive Thread Drift Fosters Occasionally Insightful Morality/Spelling Debate Amongst 14-year-old Slashdotters.Surprisingly, Haiti Remains in Need of Assistance; Radio Operators Still Shot.Godwin's Law Invoked at 11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867614</id>
	<title>Warning: Tor is a Honeypot!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264276980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>even penis bird wouldn't be stupid enough to use Tor!</p><p>But Alice was stupid and ate/drank.</p><p>Are you as stupid as Alice?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>even penis bird would n't be stupid enough to use Tor ! But Alice was stupid and ate/drank.Are you as stupid as Alice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>even penis bird wouldn't be stupid enough to use Tor!But Alice was stupid and ate/drank.Are you as stupid as Alice?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867604</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Mr. Freeman</author>
	<datestamp>1264276920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>By "right people" he means people that need the supplies rather than jackshits that will horde everything and try to sell it to starving people for everything they have left.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By " right people " he means people that need the supplies rather than jackshits that will horde everything and try to sell it to starving people for everything they have left .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By "right people" he means people that need the supplies rather than jackshits that will horde everything and try to sell it to starving people for everything they have left.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867544</id>
	<title>Right idea, poorly phrased.</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1264189680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I don't share your cynicism about our Haitian brothers, I do agree with the general premise of acting locally first. Many of our fellow citizens are dying of hunger and disease yet receive no support. When our children receive a good education and are not straddled with billions in debt then we can look to help others. That being said all good actions are just, and I'm proud to see that the power of giving is still embeded in our nation, despite so many divisions. If only the focus was not on one off disasters but sustained giving.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I do n't share your cynicism about our Haitian brothers , I do agree with the general premise of acting locally first .
Many of our fellow citizens are dying of hunger and disease yet receive no support .
When our children receive a good education and are not straddled with billions in debt then we can look to help others .
That being said all good actions are just , and I 'm proud to see that the power of giving is still embeded in our nation , despite so many divisions .
If only the focus was not on one off disasters but sustained giving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I don't share your cynicism about our Haitian brothers, I do agree with the general premise of acting locally first.
Many of our fellow citizens are dying of hunger and disease yet receive no support.
When our children receive a good education and are not straddled with billions in debt then we can look to help others.
That being said all good actions are just, and I'm proud to see that the power of giving is still embeded in our nation, despite so many divisions.
If only the focus was not on one off disasters but sustained giving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868056</id>
	<title>tor honeypot - don't use - alice says "goodness!"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264240620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is tor really compromised? i don't believe the official news, i believe it's all a honeypot</p><p>alice said, "goodness!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is tor really compromised ?
i do n't believe the official news , i believe it 's all a honeypotalice said , " goodness !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is tor really compromised?
i don't believe the official news, i believe it's all a honeypotalice said, "goodness!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</id>
	<title>Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264188780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We go over there to give them aid, and they get mad because we weren't there sooner. When we actually are there, they shoot at us and steal our things.
Yes, they had a natural disaster. It sucks. But why don't we divert some of this money we're sending to other nations into OUR home?
There are people starving on our streets.
There are kids without shoes in our communities.
There are homeless people desperately scraping by.

If we focused our efforts on OUR country, we'd be able to make sure everyone was well cared for. We have enough money and resources for ourselves, but when we try to play babysitter to the rest of the world, we get shafted.

Selfish? Maybe. But sometimes you have to feed your own family first before you worry about the rest of the world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We go over there to give them aid , and they get mad because we were n't there sooner .
When we actually are there , they shoot at us and steal our things .
Yes , they had a natural disaster .
It sucks .
But why do n't we divert some of this money we 're sending to other nations into OUR home ?
There are people starving on our streets .
There are kids without shoes in our communities .
There are homeless people desperately scraping by .
If we focused our efforts on OUR country , we 'd be able to make sure everyone was well cared for .
We have enough money and resources for ourselves , but when we try to play babysitter to the rest of the world , we get shafted .
Selfish ? Maybe .
But sometimes you have to feed your own family first before you worry about the rest of the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We go over there to give them aid, and they get mad because we weren't there sooner.
When we actually are there, they shoot at us and steal our things.
Yes, they had a natural disaster.
It sucks.
But why don't we divert some of this money we're sending to other nations into OUR home?
There are people starving on our streets.
There are kids without shoes in our communities.
There are homeless people desperately scraping by.
If we focused our efforts on OUR country, we'd be able to make sure everyone was well cared for.
We have enough money and resources for ourselves, but when we try to play babysitter to the rest of the world, we get shafted.
Selfish? Maybe.
But sometimes you have to feed your own family first before you worry about the rest of the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30872184</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>dryeo</author>
	<datestamp>1264238640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh? America was founded on the principle of killing other people and taking their stuff.<br>It didn't take long for the first settlers to start killing the people that were there first. Though it did help them cooperate.<br>And your house that was built by someone else on land that was cleared by someone else was acquired by stealing, cheating and killing. At that the policy of America was genocide for quite a while.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
America was founded on the principle of killing other people and taking their stuff.It did n't take long for the first settlers to start killing the people that were there first .
Though it did help them cooperate.And your house that was built by someone else on land that was cleared by someone else was acquired by stealing , cheating and killing .
At that the policy of America was genocide for quite a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
America was founded on the principle of killing other people and taking their stuff.It didn't take long for the first settlers to start killing the people that were there first.
Though it did help them cooperate.And your house that was built by someone else on land that was cleared by someone else was acquired by stealing, cheating and killing.
At that the policy of America was genocide for quite a while.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870458</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>theLOUDroom</author>
	<datestamp>1264269660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow!  You sound like a real scumbag!<br>
<br>
Shooting random people just because they might have food is not ok.<br>
Not even if you're starving.<br>
<br>
You always have a choice.  Go fishing.  Eat a dog.  Eat a dead body.  Whatever it takes.<br>
<br>
And yes there are right and wrong hands for these supplies.  That you don't understand this implies you are a very ignorant person.<br>
Try reading a little bit about Somolia.<br>
<br>
The whole "You Americans are so fortunate you have no right to judge" thing is a pile of crap.<br>
There is right and there is wrong.<br>
When the first settlers landed here, the situation they were faced with was much worse than what we are talking about today.
They had to fend for themselves or die.  Sure, they could have turned on themselves and killed each other for their food stores and then finally starved to death when they ran out, but instead they <b>built</b> and they <b>cooperated</b>.  The fact that this country even exists, is largely because people stood up and did the right thing at the right time, even though they might have died trying.<br>
<br>
I live in a house built by someone else, on land cleared by someone else, with water and food provided by other people.  This is all possible precisely because everyone is not running around killing each other for what they may or may not have.  We as a society have a shared understanding, that killing me is not ok and me killing someone else is not ok.  If we were to abandon this concept, America would quickly degenerate into something worse than any third-world hellhole you can possibly imagine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow !
You sound like a real scumbag !
Shooting random people just because they might have food is not ok . Not even if you 're starving .
You always have a choice .
Go fishing .
Eat a dog .
Eat a dead body .
Whatever it takes .
And yes there are right and wrong hands for these supplies .
That you do n't understand this implies you are a very ignorant person .
Try reading a little bit about Somolia .
The whole " You Americans are so fortunate you have no right to judge " thing is a pile of crap .
There is right and there is wrong .
When the first settlers landed here , the situation they were faced with was much worse than what we are talking about today .
They had to fend for themselves or die .
Sure , they could have turned on themselves and killed each other for their food stores and then finally starved to death when they ran out , but instead they built and they cooperated .
The fact that this country even exists , is largely because people stood up and did the right thing at the right time , even though they might have died trying .
I live in a house built by someone else , on land cleared by someone else , with water and food provided by other people .
This is all possible precisely because everyone is not running around killing each other for what they may or may not have .
We as a society have a shared understanding , that killing me is not ok and me killing someone else is not ok. If we were to abandon this concept , America would quickly degenerate into something worse than any third-world hellhole you can possibly imagine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow!
You sound like a real scumbag!
Shooting random people just because they might have food is not ok.
Not even if you're starving.
You always have a choice.
Go fishing.
Eat a dog.
Eat a dead body.
Whatever it takes.
And yes there are right and wrong hands for these supplies.
That you don't understand this implies you are a very ignorant person.
Try reading a little bit about Somolia.
The whole "You Americans are so fortunate you have no right to judge" thing is a pile of crap.
There is right and there is wrong.
When the first settlers landed here, the situation they were faced with was much worse than what we are talking about today.
They had to fend for themselves or die.
Sure, they could have turned on themselves and killed each other for their food stores and then finally starved to death when they ran out, but instead they built and they cooperated.
The fact that this country even exists, is largely because people stood up and did the right thing at the right time, even though they might have died trying.
I live in a house built by someone else, on land cleared by someone else, with water and food provided by other people.
This is all possible precisely because everyone is not running around killing each other for what they may or may not have.
We as a society have a shared understanding, that killing me is not ok and me killing someone else is not ok.  If we were to abandon this concept, America would quickly degenerate into something worse than any third-world hellhole you can possibly imagine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867612</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>TomXP411</author>
	<datestamp>1264276980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remember Somalia? Warlords there grabbed airdropped supplies and then SOLD them at ridiculous prices.

According to the news, the prisons are as broken as everything else, and criminals are running rampant. The Haitian police are nowhere to be found. This is exactly why the US sent in soldiers first, this time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember Somalia ?
Warlords there grabbed airdropped supplies and then SOLD them at ridiculous prices .
According to the news , the prisons are as broken as everything else , and criminals are running rampant .
The Haitian police are nowhere to be found .
This is exactly why the US sent in soldiers first , this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember Somalia?
Warlords there grabbed airdropped supplies and then SOLD them at ridiculous prices.
According to the news, the prisons are as broken as everything else, and criminals are running rampant.
The Haitian police are nowhere to be found.
This is exactly why the US sent in soldiers first, this time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846</id>
	<title>Dear Hugo Chavez</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264237320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This would be one of the reasons why we're sending our military.</p><p>Love,</p><p>The USA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be one of the reasons why we 're sending our military.Love,The USA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be one of the reasons why we're sending our military.Love,The USA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868382</id>
	<title>Clueless nonsense</title>
	<author>Quadraginta</author>
	<datestamp>1264246500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, but actual experience and history shows that you have it exactly backwards.  It's people in really awful situations that tend to think long and hard about the morality of what they do -- who do the most to help each other out, do the least to exploit and brutalize each other.</p><p>The concept of dispensing with morality and taking a Look Out For Number One attitude is the luxury -- because you can only take that attitude if your life is so sheltered that you don't realize how much you really do depend on others.  If you're the kind of person who assumes that just because you have a lot of pieces of green paper in your pocket, you can do anything you want, and you don't need another soul, then yes you could have this kind of amoral every man for himself attitude.</p><p>But when civilization breaks down, and you realize that all the money and social status in the world won't get you a drink of water from the rainbarrel your dirt-poor neighbor happens to have, well, then you start to realize rather well how interdependent people are. And when you start to realize that the <i>only</i> thing you have to gain trusted access to group resources is your word, your honor, your reliability -- well, then, you gain a new appreciation for the very practical value of social ethics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but actual experience and history shows that you have it exactly backwards .
It 's people in really awful situations that tend to think long and hard about the morality of what they do -- who do the most to help each other out , do the least to exploit and brutalize each other.The concept of dispensing with morality and taking a Look Out For Number One attitude is the luxury -- because you can only take that attitude if your life is so sheltered that you do n't realize how much you really do depend on others .
If you 're the kind of person who assumes that just because you have a lot of pieces of green paper in your pocket , you can do anything you want , and you do n't need another soul , then yes you could have this kind of amoral every man for himself attitude.But when civilization breaks down , and you realize that all the money and social status in the world wo n't get you a drink of water from the rainbarrel your dirt-poor neighbor happens to have , well , then you start to realize rather well how interdependent people are .
And when you start to realize that the only thing you have to gain trusted access to group resources is your word , your honor , your reliability -- well , then , you gain a new appreciation for the very practical value of social ethics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but actual experience and history shows that you have it exactly backwards.
It's people in really awful situations that tend to think long and hard about the morality of what they do -- who do the most to help each other out, do the least to exploit and brutalize each other.The concept of dispensing with morality and taking a Look Out For Number One attitude is the luxury -- because you can only take that attitude if your life is so sheltered that you don't realize how much you really do depend on others.
If you're the kind of person who assumes that just because you have a lot of pieces of green paper in your pocket, you can do anything you want, and you don't need another soul, then yes you could have this kind of amoral every man for himself attitude.But when civilization breaks down, and you realize that all the money and social status in the world won't get you a drink of water from the rainbarrel your dirt-poor neighbor happens to have, well, then you start to realize rather well how interdependent people are.
And when you start to realize that the only thing you have to gain trusted access to group resources is your word, your honor, your reliability -- well, then, you gain a new appreciation for the very practical value of social ethics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30877364</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Carewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1264336680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you remember, the US send soldiers to Somalia as well. It didn't help much, and the soldiers were pulled out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you remember , the US send soldiers to Somalia as well .
It did n't help much , and the soldiers were pulled out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you remember, the US send soldiers to Somalia as well.
It didn't help much, and the soldiers were pulled out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30871990</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Josh04</author>
	<datestamp>1264237260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Didn't they kill all the natives?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't they kill all the natives ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't they kill all the natives?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30871018</id>
	<title>I would point out...</title>
	<author>absurdist</author>
	<datestamp>1264274460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...that nowhere in this article does it say who fired on these people.  It could just as easily have been Haitian police, private security, or UN troops.  I doubt even they know; generally when being fired upon the proper response doesn't involve stopping to ask origin or intent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...that nowhere in this article does it say who fired on these people .
It could just as easily have been Haitian police , private security , or UN troops .
I doubt even they know ; generally when being fired upon the proper response does n't involve stopping to ask origin or intent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that nowhere in this article does it say who fired on these people.
It could just as easily have been Haitian police, private security, or UN troops.
I doubt even they know; generally when being fired upon the proper response doesn't involve stopping to ask origin or intent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30876914</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you for this information.</title>
	<author>bhiestand</author>
	<datestamp>1264328160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip, duck under the water and they will let go quickly."</p><p>Now I know that if the lifeguard trying to save me starts to drown/sink... they're just faking.  Better to hang on tight, knowing they will soon surface for air.</p></div><p>If you're thinking clearly enough to remember that, you're not panicking.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip , duck under the water and they will let go quickly .
" Now I know that if the lifeguard trying to save me starts to drown/sink... they 're just faking .
Better to hang on tight , knowing they will soon surface for air.If you 're thinking clearly enough to remember that , you 're not panicking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If they grab onto you with the octopus-death-grip, duck under the water and they will let go quickly.
"Now I know that if the lifeguard trying to save me starts to drown/sink... they're just faking.
Better to hang on tight, knowing they will soon surface for air.If you're thinking clearly enough to remember that, you're not panicking.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868596</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264250100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;  wiith well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you're going to have is? Fuck! That's dinner. Get the gun.</p><p>Damn those radio antennas sure are tasty too!  Better wrap them in cables to add a little spice, yummy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; wiith well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you 're going to have is ?
Fuck ! That 's dinner .
Get the gun.Damn those radio antennas sure are tasty too !
Better wrap them in cables to add a little spice , yummy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;  wiith well-dressed people and boxes upon boxes of equipment -- you know what the first thought you're going to have is?
Fuck! That's dinner.
Get the gun.Damn those radio antennas sure are tasty too!
Better wrap them in cables to add a little spice, yummy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869104</id>
	<title>Old News</title>
	<author>Vskye</author>
	<datestamp>1264256520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was posted on the the ARRL website <a href="http://www.arrl.org/" title="arrl.org">http://www.arrl.org/</a> [arrl.org] on the 18th, 5 days ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was posted on the the ARRL website http : //www.arrl.org/ [ arrl.org ] on the 18th , 5 days ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was posted on the the ARRL website http://www.arrl.org/ [arrl.org] on the 18th, 5 days ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480</id>
	<title>Try to give them help and this is what they get?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264188540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The amateur radio operators are absolutely essential in a place where most of the communications structure has failed, and they didn't have much to begin with.</p><p>The fact that these guys are being fired upon just shows how much trouble Hatti is in right now. If there's no law enforcement left, just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands?</p><p>If they knew who these people were... why are they trying to scare away people who are rebuilding communication structures?<br>If they didn't know who these people were... are they attacking anybody in a moving vehicle hoping they've got supplies they an steal for themselves without waiting in line like everybody else?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The amateur radio operators are absolutely essential in a place where most of the communications structure has failed , and they did n't have much to begin with.The fact that these guys are being fired upon just shows how much trouble Hatti is in right now .
If there 's no law enforcement left , just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands ? If they knew who these people were... why are they trying to scare away people who are rebuilding communication structures ? If they did n't know who these people were... are they attacking anybody in a moving vehicle hoping they 've got supplies they an steal for themselves without waiting in line like everybody else ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The amateur radio operators are absolutely essential in a place where most of the communications structure has failed, and they didn't have much to begin with.The fact that these guys are being fired upon just shows how much trouble Hatti is in right now.
If there's no law enforcement left, just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands?If they knew who these people were... why are they trying to scare away people who are rebuilding communication structures?If they didn't know who these people were... are they attacking anybody in a moving vehicle hoping they've got supplies they an steal for themselves without waiting in line like everybody else?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869348</id>
	<title>Monday morning quarterbacks...</title>
	<author>Zooperman</author>
	<datestamp>1264259220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>And still people criticize us for sending in troops to impose order and stability, in a place that never had it to begin with. I got news for you bleeding hearts. If you want to help those people, re-establish law and order first. Once that is done, the business of distributing food and water, rebuilding infrastructure, re-establishing basic public services like sanitation etc, becomes infinitely easier.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And still people criticize us for sending in troops to impose order and stability , in a place that never had it to begin with .
I got news for you bleeding hearts .
If you want to help those people , re-establish law and order first .
Once that is done , the business of distributing food and water , rebuilding infrastructure , re-establishing basic public services like sanitation etc , becomes infinitely easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And still people criticize us for sending in troops to impose order and stability, in a place that never had it to begin with.
I got news for you bleeding hearts.
If you want to help those people, re-establish law and order first.
Once that is done, the business of distributing food and water, rebuilding infrastructure, re-establishing basic public services like sanitation etc, becomes infinitely easier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867868</id>
	<title>Re:Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>cdfh</author>
	<datestamp>1264237800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We go over there to give them aid, and they get mad because we weren't there sooner. When we actually are there, they shoot at us and steal our things.</p></div><p>Obviously you're grossly over-generalising, etc, etc. But more to the point, this is predictable, and it's not their faults. If you dine in front of a starving person, expect them to get angry. If you go on a spending spree in front of a homeless person, expect them to get pissed. </p><p>I don't know enough about the incident in question to respond directly to it, but I'm responding to your comment in general. They ("they" referring to the people in Haiti who have been affected by the disaster)  do not have perfect information (they don't know whether the rest of the world is helping, or whether we're too busy with our trivial lives (which, incidentally, for the most part, we are)). If they see some folk who look like tourists, surrounded by life's luxuries, cruise by in a van, they're going to get angry. Sure, it'd be nice if they approached the situation more logically---maybe querying the tourists as to their purpose there---but in their situation, I'm betting emotions are going to come first. </p><p>Despite the fact that I strongly disagreed with her previous post, girlintraining made a good point about helping a drowning person. They're likely to cling to you, probably endangering you both. But that \_doesn't\_ mean you shouldn't help them, and that \_doesn't\_ make them a bad person. It's an understandable and predictable response. It means you should factor it in when trying to help them. If you want to help a lion with a thorn in its paw, don't be surprised if it tries to eat you first. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We go over there to give them aid , and they get mad because we were n't there sooner .
When we actually are there , they shoot at us and steal our things.Obviously you 're grossly over-generalising , etc , etc .
But more to the point , this is predictable , and it 's not their faults .
If you dine in front of a starving person , expect them to get angry .
If you go on a spending spree in front of a homeless person , expect them to get pissed .
I do n't know enough about the incident in question to respond directly to it , but I 'm responding to your comment in general .
They ( " they " referring to the people in Haiti who have been affected by the disaster ) do not have perfect information ( they do n't know whether the rest of the world is helping , or whether we 're too busy with our trivial lives ( which , incidentally , for the most part , we are ) ) .
If they see some folk who look like tourists , surrounded by life 's luxuries , cruise by in a van , they 're going to get angry .
Sure , it 'd be nice if they approached the situation more logically---maybe querying the tourists as to their purpose there---but in their situation , I 'm betting emotions are going to come first .
Despite the fact that I strongly disagreed with her previous post , girlintraining made a good point about helping a drowning person .
They 're likely to cling to you , probably endangering you both .
But that \ _does n't \ _ mean you should n't help them , and that \ _does n't \ _ make them a bad person .
It 's an understandable and predictable response .
It means you should factor it in when trying to help them .
If you want to help a lion with a thorn in its paw , do n't be surprised if it tries to eat you first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We go over there to give them aid, and they get mad because we weren't there sooner.
When we actually are there, they shoot at us and steal our things.Obviously you're grossly over-generalising, etc, etc.
But more to the point, this is predictable, and it's not their faults.
If you dine in front of a starving person, expect them to get angry.
If you go on a spending spree in front of a homeless person, expect them to get pissed.
I don't know enough about the incident in question to respond directly to it, but I'm responding to your comment in general.
They ("they" referring to the people in Haiti who have been affected by the disaster)  do not have perfect information (they don't know whether the rest of the world is helping, or whether we're too busy with our trivial lives (which, incidentally, for the most part, we are)).
If they see some folk who look like tourists, surrounded by life's luxuries, cruise by in a van, they're going to get angry.
Sure, it'd be nice if they approached the situation more logically---maybe querying the tourists as to their purpose there---but in their situation, I'm betting emotions are going to come first.
Despite the fact that I strongly disagreed with her previous post, girlintraining made a good point about helping a drowning person.
They're likely to cling to you, probably endangering you both.
But that \_doesn't\_ mean you shouldn't help them, and that \_doesn't\_ make them a bad person.
It's an understandable and predictable response.
It means you should factor it in when trying to help them.
If you want to help a lion with a thorn in its paw, don't be surprised if it tries to eat you first. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869176</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Hugo Chavez</title>
	<author>Neoprofin</author>
	<datestamp>1264257360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You must have missed the press conference where Hugo Chavez claimed the earthquake was caused by a weapon of the U.S. Navy that they're planing on using on Iran soon. I was glad to see that he's so concerned about the Haitians' plight that he took the time to draw attention to this threat.<br> <br>

The best part is the U.S. isn't even in charge of security, though they've offered. Everyone is stuck waiting on member states to donate more UN peacekeepers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You must have missed the press conference where Hugo Chavez claimed the earthquake was caused by a weapon of the U.S. Navy that they 're planing on using on Iran soon .
I was glad to see that he 's so concerned about the Haitians ' plight that he took the time to draw attention to this threat .
The best part is the U.S. is n't even in charge of security , though they 've offered .
Everyone is stuck waiting on member states to donate more UN peacekeepers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must have missed the press conference where Hugo Chavez claimed the earthquake was caused by a weapon of the U.S. Navy that they're planing on using on Iran soon.
I was glad to see that he's so concerned about the Haitians' plight that he took the time to draw attention to this threat.
The best part is the U.S. isn't even in charge of security, though they've offered.
Everyone is stuck waiting on member states to donate more UN peacekeepers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867588</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>gillbates</author>
	<datestamp>1264190280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>
Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford.
</i>
</p><p>
Well, in this respect Haiti must be rather affluent. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiti#Religion" title="wikipedia.org">96</a> [wikipedia.org] percent of Haitians are Christian, which makes them more religious than the United States.
</p><p>
The poor can embrace morality, if for no other reason, as a matter of pragmatism.  The rich are generally well insulated from the consequences of their actions and can do as they please.
</p><p>
If a society won't abide by a common morality under all conditions, why have morality at all?  In such a case, it becomes what we in the Western world call politeness.  The common morality in Haiti allows people to share, so that instead of one person hoarding and everyone else starving, you have everyone surviving, even if not as well fed as they would like.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford .
Well , in this respect Haiti must be rather affluent .
96 [ wikipedia.org ] percent of Haitians are Christian , which makes them more religious than the United States .
The poor can embrace morality , if for no other reason , as a matter of pragmatism .
The rich are generally well insulated from the consequences of their actions and can do as they please .
If a society wo n't abide by a common morality under all conditions , why have morality at all ?
In such a case , it becomes what we in the Western world call politeness .
The common morality in Haiti allows people to share , so that instead of one person hoarding and everyone else starving , you have everyone surviving , even if not as well fed as they would like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 
Morality is a luxury that not everybody can afford.
Well, in this respect Haiti must be rather affluent.
96 [wikipedia.org] percent of Haitians are Christian, which makes them more religious than the United States.
The poor can embrace morality, if for no other reason, as a matter of pragmatism.
The rich are generally well insulated from the consequences of their actions and can do as they please.
If a society won't abide by a common morality under all conditions, why have morality at all?
In such a case, it becomes what we in the Western world call politeness.
The common morality in Haiti allows people to share, so that instead of one person hoarding and everyone else starving, you have everyone surviving, even if not as well fed as they would like.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867764</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1264278960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What are you basing all this on?  (A recent batman movie perhaps?)  The vast majority of hungry people in Haiti right now are NOT acting as you believe to be inevitable.  Moreover, from the <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jJ4ufrzfFMQbvUHuvq36Kofnel0A" title="google.com">reporting I've read,</a> [google.com] the hungry people are not the most likely to be violent.  The problem that's really worrying people is the gangs - the people that were already criminals vying for power <i>before</i> the disaster, and who (for that reason) are armed, and a number of whom escaped from prison when it crumbled in the quake.  They're not hoarding to fill their bellies, they're hoarding because when food is scarce, food is power.  You might say they vindicate your theories, but again, they were already at it <i>before</i> the quake, and they are not most of the people in Haiti.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you basing all this on ?
( A recent batman movie perhaps ?
) The vast majority of hungry people in Haiti right now are NOT acting as you believe to be inevitable .
Moreover , from the reporting I 've read , [ google.com ] the hungry people are not the most likely to be violent .
The problem that 's really worrying people is the gangs - the people that were already criminals vying for power before the disaster , and who ( for that reason ) are armed , and a number of whom escaped from prison when it crumbled in the quake .
They 're not hoarding to fill their bellies , they 're hoarding because when food is scarce , food is power .
You might say they vindicate your theories , but again , they were already at it before the quake , and they are not most of the people in Haiti .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you basing all this on?
(A recent batman movie perhaps?
)  The vast majority of hungry people in Haiti right now are NOT acting as you believe to be inevitable.
Moreover, from the reporting I've read, [google.com] the hungry people are not the most likely to be violent.
The problem that's really worrying people is the gangs - the people that were already criminals vying for power before the disaster, and who (for that reason) are armed, and a number of whom escaped from prison when it crumbled in the quake.
They're not hoarding to fill their bellies, they're hoarding because when food is scarce, food is power.
You might say they vindicate your theories, but again, they were already at it before the quake, and they are not most of the people in Haiti.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867818</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>cdfh</author>
	<datestamp>1264279980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>If there's no law enforcement left, just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands?</p></div><p>The "right hands"? That's rather arrogant of you.</p></div><p>No, it's not. The emergency supplies should be distributed as evenly as possible, with bias in favour of those who need it most. If you're in the sort of situation that people in Haiti are in, and you see a van full of everything you need to survive, you're quite possibly going to do whatever you need to do to get at it (as you yourself mention). Allowing this to happen is \_not\_ in the best interest of the population as a whole. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in the slightest blaming, judging or harbouring negative thoughts against these people---quite the opposite. But what I am saying is that to help them requires proper organisation, and not recklessly sparking a riot, during which supplies will be wasted, and distributed to only a fraction of the number of people which could be allowed to benefit from them.</p><p>Notice that just because I am writing this in the comfort of my armchair does not make it any less true. If I were in their position, I would probably do the same. If you read this as anything even resembling an attack on the people in question, then you read this wrong (or I explained it wrong, or whatever).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there 's no law enforcement left , just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands ? The " right hands " ?
That 's rather arrogant of you.No , it 's not .
The emergency supplies should be distributed as evenly as possible , with bias in favour of those who need it most .
If you 're in the sort of situation that people in Haiti are in , and you see a van full of everything you need to survive , you 're quite possibly going to do whatever you need to do to get at it ( as you yourself mention ) .
Allowing this to happen is \ _not \ _ in the best interest of the population as a whole .
Do n't get me wrong , I 'm not in the slightest blaming , judging or harbouring negative thoughts against these people---quite the opposite .
But what I am saying is that to help them requires proper organisation , and not recklessly sparking a riot , during which supplies will be wasted , and distributed to only a fraction of the number of people which could be allowed to benefit from them.Notice that just because I am writing this in the comfort of my armchair does not make it any less true .
If I were in their position , I would probably do the same .
If you read this as anything even resembling an attack on the people in question , then you read this wrong ( or I explained it wrong , or whatever ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there's no law enforcement left, just how are the emergency supplies that are moving all to slowly going to wind up in the right hands?The "right hands"?
That's rather arrogant of you.No, it's not.
The emergency supplies should be distributed as evenly as possible, with bias in favour of those who need it most.
If you're in the sort of situation that people in Haiti are in, and you see a van full of everything you need to survive, you're quite possibly going to do whatever you need to do to get at it (as you yourself mention).
Allowing this to happen is \_not\_ in the best interest of the population as a whole.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in the slightest blaming, judging or harbouring negative thoughts against these people---quite the opposite.
But what I am saying is that to help them requires proper organisation, and not recklessly sparking a riot, during which supplies will be wasted, and distributed to only a fraction of the number of people which could be allowed to benefit from them.Notice that just because I am writing this in the comfort of my armchair does not make it any less true.
If I were in their position, I would probably do the same.
If you read this as anything even resembling an attack on the people in question, then you read this wrong (or I explained it wrong, or whatever).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870324</id>
	<title>Re:Not buying it!</title>
	<author>WAG24601G</author>
	<datestamp>1264268700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FAIL.

I've been a 'professional radio operator', and you are confusing skill with procedure.  We worked with numerous volunteer HAM operators with years of experience who basically showed us how it's done in the field.  Yes, there are tons of agency-specific rules and procedures that you have to practice 40+ hours a week to have down.  But when technology (inevitably) went sour, the HAM operators were the ones able to keep working.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FAIL .
I 've been a 'professional radio operator ' , and you are confusing skill with procedure .
We worked with numerous volunteer HAM operators with years of experience who basically showed us how it 's done in the field .
Yes , there are tons of agency-specific rules and procedures that you have to practice 40 + hours a week to have down .
But when technology ( inevitably ) went sour , the HAM operators were the ones able to keep working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FAIL.
I've been a 'professional radio operator', and you are confusing skill with procedure.
We worked with numerous volunteer HAM operators with years of experience who basically showed us how it's done in the field.
Yes, there are tons of agency-specific rules and procedures that you have to practice 40+ hours a week to have down.
But when technology (inevitably) went sour, the HAM operators were the ones able to keep working.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867554</id>
	<title>Re:Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264189800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't even know where to begin with this... When you say "they", do you mean that everybody in the country has the same mindset, that they all want to shoot you and steal your things? Out there are people needing help. The fact that they are surrounded by thugs makes it more urgent. And yet you want to run at the first sign of adversity. Also, the homeless you've always had with you, even in times of no disaster. If you haven't lifted a finger to help them then, chances are, you're not going to do a thing now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't even know where to begin with this... When you say " they " , do you mean that everybody in the country has the same mindset , that they all want to shoot you and steal your things ?
Out there are people needing help .
The fact that they are surrounded by thugs makes it more urgent .
And yet you want to run at the first sign of adversity .
Also , the homeless you 've always had with you , even in times of no disaster .
If you have n't lifted a finger to help them then , chances are , you 're not going to do a thing now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't even know where to begin with this... When you say "they", do you mean that everybody in the country has the same mindset, that they all want to shoot you and steal your things?
Out there are people needing help.
The fact that they are surrounded by thugs makes it more urgent.
And yet you want to run at the first sign of adversity.
Also, the homeless you've always had with you, even in times of no disaster.
If you haven't lifted a finger to help them then, chances are, you're not going to do a thing now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868594</id>
	<title>Re:Lose sovereignty, gain humanity?</title>
	<author>FailedTheTuringTest</author>
	<datestamp>1264250100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the same thing was said about Iraq: "Surely conquerors showing up with promises of food and infrastructure would be preferred to Saddam Hussein's government..."  I would not bet on re-colonizing Haiti working out better than regime change in Iraq.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the same thing was said about Iraq : " Surely conquerors showing up with promises of food and infrastructure would be preferred to Saddam Hussein 's government... " I would not bet on re-colonizing Haiti working out better than regime change in Iraq .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the same thing was said about Iraq: "Surely conquerors showing up with promises of food and infrastructure would be preferred to Saddam Hussein's government..."  I would not bet on re-colonizing Haiti working out better than regime change in Iraq.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30872522</id>
	<title>Remember Katrina?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264241100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The same thing happened after Katrina.  Relief workers and trucks loaded with much needed supplies were fired upon, and forced to flee for their lives.  And speaking of Katrina, many Amateur Radio operators were there and saved many lives.  They weren't paid to be there, nor were they there to get a pat on the back later (Though some recognition is the LEAST that they deserve!).  Google NF5B.  Amongst the articles about aircraft etc, you will find a few accounts of two of the true heroes of the Katrina disaster and fiasco.  A blind musician and his wheelchair bound lady were there when they were needed most to help a hospital communicate with the outside world when all other means of communication had failed.  And they were not the only ones.</p><p>Even before being called upon, there were many more Amateur Radio operators than were needed who volunteered to go in  after Katrina hit    These people were willing to put their skills, their equipment, and in some cases their lives on the line when needed.  And yet most often when the average person thinks of Amateur Radio operators, they are thought of as "that guy that messes up my cable TV"  or "that guy with the ugly antennas that lower my property value".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The same thing happened after Katrina .
Relief workers and trucks loaded with much needed supplies were fired upon , and forced to flee for their lives .
And speaking of Katrina , many Amateur Radio operators were there and saved many lives .
They were n't paid to be there , nor were they there to get a pat on the back later ( Though some recognition is the LEAST that they deserve ! ) .
Google NF5B .
Amongst the articles about aircraft etc , you will find a few accounts of two of the true heroes of the Katrina disaster and fiasco .
A blind musician and his wheelchair bound lady were there when they were needed most to help a hospital communicate with the outside world when all other means of communication had failed .
And they were not the only ones.Even before being called upon , there were many more Amateur Radio operators than were needed who volunteered to go in after Katrina hit These people were willing to put their skills , their equipment , and in some cases their lives on the line when needed .
And yet most often when the average person thinks of Amateur Radio operators , they are thought of as " that guy that messes up my cable TV " or " that guy with the ugly antennas that lower my property value " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same thing happened after Katrina.
Relief workers and trucks loaded with much needed supplies were fired upon, and forced to flee for their lives.
And speaking of Katrina, many Amateur Radio operators were there and saved many lives.
They weren't paid to be there, nor were they there to get a pat on the back later (Though some recognition is the LEAST that they deserve!).
Google NF5B.
Amongst the articles about aircraft etc, you will find a few accounts of two of the true heroes of the Katrina disaster and fiasco.
A blind musician and his wheelchair bound lady were there when they were needed most to help a hospital communicate with the outside world when all other means of communication had failed.
And they were not the only ones.Even before being called upon, there were many more Amateur Radio operators than were needed who volunteered to go in  after Katrina hit    These people were willing to put their skills, their equipment, and in some cases their lives on the line when needed.
And yet most often when the average person thinks of Amateur Radio operators, they are thought of as "that guy that messes up my cable TV"  or "that guy with the ugly antennas that lower my property value".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874792</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you for this information.</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1264260480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sure, let's see you do that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , let 's see you do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, let's see you do that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867646</id>
	<title>Is it so bad?</title>
	<author>martinX</author>
	<datestamp>1264277460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who amongst us hasn't wanted to take a few potshots at radio hams. Them and their damned yagis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who amongst us has n't wanted to take a few potshots at radio hams .
Them and their damned yagis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who amongst us hasn't wanted to take a few potshots at radio hams.
Them and their damned yagis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867704</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1264278300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The right hands" refers to the people that have the means to properly, and fairly distribute those supplies so that they provide the greatest possible benefit.</p><p>Not exactly a hard concept, but what the hell, sometimes it's fun to play controversial and try to twist words and meanings of others to make yourself look more "progressive".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The right hands " refers to the people that have the means to properly , and fairly distribute those supplies so that they provide the greatest possible benefit.Not exactly a hard concept , but what the hell , sometimes it 's fun to play controversial and try to twist words and meanings of others to make yourself look more " progressive " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The right hands" refers to the people that have the means to properly, and fairly distribute those supplies so that they provide the greatest possible benefit.Not exactly a hard concept, but what the hell, sometimes it's fun to play controversial and try to twist words and meanings of others to make yourself look more "progressive".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867972</id>
	<title>Re:Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264239180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And man, where are they starving in the streets? If you see them, tell them to come to San Mateo, because here we take care of people like that.</p> </div><p>Indeed.  Here in Canada, truly starving to death, with no food for weeks, is quite a feat to accomplish for a person without other medical issues involved.   Give it a try.  Before long, nice people in jumpsuits will show up and haul you off to the hospital and force-feed you.

The kind of poverty in a country like Haiti simply does not exist in a developed country.  It is wholly incomparable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And man , where are they starving in the streets ?
If you see them , tell them to come to San Mateo , because here we take care of people like that .
Indeed. Here in Canada , truly starving to death , with no food for weeks , is quite a feat to accomplish for a person without other medical issues involved .
Give it a try .
Before long , nice people in jumpsuits will show up and haul you off to the hospital and force-feed you .
The kind of poverty in a country like Haiti simply does not exist in a developed country .
It is wholly incomparable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And man, where are they starving in the streets?
If you see them, tell them to come to San Mateo, because here we take care of people like that.
Indeed.  Here in Canada, truly starving to death, with no food for weeks, is quite a feat to accomplish for a person without other medical issues involved.
Give it a try.
Before long, nice people in jumpsuits will show up and haul you off to the hospital and force-feed you.
The kind of poverty in a country like Haiti simply does not exist in a developed country.
It is wholly incomparable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867816</id>
	<title>Re:Let 'em sink...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264279980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> There are people starving on our streets. There are kids without shoes in our communities.</p> </div><p>Wow, what community do you live in?  I've lived in some pooor places, and I've never seen anywhere that the kids go without shoes (except by choice).  They may have some ugly, cheap, beat-up shoes, but not shoeless.  And man, where are they starving in the streets?  If you see them, tell them to come to San Mateo, because here we take care of people like that.
<br> <br>
I'm guessing your BSing</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are people starving on our streets .
There are kids without shoes in our communities .
Wow , what community do you live in ?
I 've lived in some pooor places , and I 've never seen anywhere that the kids go without shoes ( except by choice ) .
They may have some ugly , cheap , beat-up shoes , but not shoeless .
And man , where are they starving in the streets ?
If you see them , tell them to come to San Mateo , because here we take care of people like that .
I 'm guessing your BSing</tokentext>
<sentencetext> There are people starving on our streets.
There are kids without shoes in our communities.
Wow, what community do you live in?
I've lived in some pooor places, and I've never seen anywhere that the kids go without shoes (except by choice).
They may have some ugly, cheap, beat-up shoes, but not shoeless.
And man, where are they starving in the streets?
If you see them, tell them to come to San Mateo, because here we take care of people like that.
I'm guessing your BSing
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867506</id>
	<title>Amateur gets through when everything else is down.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264188840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The unsung heroes of any disaster are typically the amateur radio operators.  These guys, most of the time using their own equipment, time &amp; money will set up a repeater or HF station so communications can get in and out of a disaster area.
These guys always deserve a pat on the back as another of the "first responders".

73's!

KB0GNK</htmltext>
<tokenext>The unsung heroes of any disaster are typically the amateur radio operators .
These guys , most of the time using their own equipment , time &amp; money will set up a repeater or HF station so communications can get in and out of a disaster area .
These guys always deserve a pat on the back as another of the " first responders " .
73 's ! KB0GNK</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The unsung heroes of any disaster are typically the amateur radio operators.
These guys, most of the time using their own equipment, time &amp; money will set up a repeater or HF station so communications can get in and out of a disaster area.
These guys always deserve a pat on the back as another of the "first responders".
73's!

KB0GNK</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868960</id>
	<title>Re:Not buying it!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264254900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't usually feed Trolls, but here's a ration for you...</p><p>1. Hams are much more capable in an emergency than "Professional" operators.  Outside your control room or situation vehicle, you barely know how to find your dick to take a piss.  Hams are used to operation in field environments and practice at it frequently.</p><p>2. Hams own their own equipment and can take it at a moment's notice to the affected area. You gonna uproot your public safety tower at the police station and take it with you?  I don't think so.</p><p>3. Many Hams like myself own almost exclusively "Professional" grade gear - I own almost all Motorola radios, the same digital units the federal government uses currently.</p><p>4. Speaking of authenticity, I'd rather believe from the ARRL this happened than take the word of an anonymous Troll idiot on slashdot that it didn't.</p><p>5. Our "fantasy" world becomes "reality" every disaster, time and again.  Maybe next time we'll even save YOUR dumb ass, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't usually feed Trolls , but here 's a ration for you...1 .
Hams are much more capable in an emergency than " Professional " operators .
Outside your control room or situation vehicle , you barely know how to find your dick to take a piss .
Hams are used to operation in field environments and practice at it frequently.2 .
Hams own their own equipment and can take it at a moment 's notice to the affected area .
You gon na uproot your public safety tower at the police station and take it with you ?
I do n't think so.3 .
Many Hams like myself own almost exclusively " Professional " grade gear - I own almost all Motorola radios , the same digital units the federal government uses currently.4 .
Speaking of authenticity , I 'd rather believe from the ARRL this happened than take the word of an anonymous Troll idiot on slashdot that it did n't.5 .
Our " fantasy " world becomes " reality " every disaster , time and again .
Maybe next time we 'll even save YOUR dumb ass , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't usually feed Trolls, but here's a ration for you...1.
Hams are much more capable in an emergency than "Professional" operators.
Outside your control room or situation vehicle, you barely know how to find your dick to take a piss.
Hams are used to operation in field environments and practice at it frequently.2.
Hams own their own equipment and can take it at a moment's notice to the affected area.
You gonna uproot your public safety tower at the police station and take it with you?
I don't think so.3.
Many Hams like myself own almost exclusively "Professional" grade gear - I own almost all Motorola radios, the same digital units the federal government uses currently.4.
Speaking of authenticity, I'd rather believe from the ARRL this happened than take the word of an anonymous Troll idiot on slashdot that it didn't.5.
Our "fantasy" world becomes "reality" every disaster, time and again.
Maybe next time we'll even save YOUR dumb ass, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869296</id>
	<title>Re:Try to give them help and this is what they get</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264258740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, I saw this movie. It was called "Dark Knight." Didn't the Joker lose and Batman win?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , I saw this movie .
It was called " Dark Knight .
" Did n't the Joker lose and Batman win ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, I saw this movie.
It was called "Dark Knight.
" Didn't the Joker lose and Batman win?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30877364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30876914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30871990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30871146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30872184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_23_0230224_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30871146
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867518
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867750
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874640
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30876914
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30874792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867588
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868292
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868382
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867612
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30877364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867604
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869296
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870458
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30871990
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30872184
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868596
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867704
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30869176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868058
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867554
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_23_0230224.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30867858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30868960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_23_0230224.30870324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
