<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_25_167208</id>
	<title>Chinese Human Rights Orgs Hit By DDoS</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1264439100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Oxford\_Comma\_Lover writes <i>"IDG News Service is reporting that several human rights organizations focusing on China have been <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/187597/chinese\_human\_rights\_sites\_hit\_by\_ddos\_attack.html">hit by DDoS attacks this weekend</a>, including <a href="http://crd-net.org/Article/Class9/Class10/201001/20100125160522\_19612.html">Chinese Human Rights Defenders</a> and Civil Rights and Livelihood Watch.  The latter works on issues of mental persecution (dissidents being thrown into mental hospitals where they were forced onto medication or beaten with electric batons) and eminent-domain type problems (seizure of farmland or urban land without compensation when the government is working on a project)."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oxford \ _Comma \ _Lover writes " IDG News Service is reporting that several human rights organizations focusing on China have been hit by DDoS attacks this weekend , including Chinese Human Rights Defenders and Civil Rights and Livelihood Watch .
The latter works on issues of mental persecution ( dissidents being thrown into mental hospitals where they were forced onto medication or beaten with electric batons ) and eminent-domain type problems ( seizure of farmland or urban land without compensation when the government is working on a project ) .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oxford\_Comma\_Lover writes "IDG News Service is reporting that several human rights organizations focusing on China have been hit by DDoS attacks this weekend, including Chinese Human Rights Defenders and Civil Rights and Livelihood Watch.
The latter works on issues of mental persecution (dissidents being thrown into mental hospitals where they were forced onto medication or beaten with electric batons) and eminent-domain type problems (seizure of farmland or urban land without compensation when the government is working on a project).
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893376</id>
	<title>yes</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1264447140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and iran only wants nuclear power for peaceful purposes</p><p>(rolls eyes)</p><p>there's keeping an open mind, and then there's a giant chasm of gullibility</p><p>to entertain the notion that the chinese government is not attacking chinese human rights activists through electronic means is stupefyingly naive</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and iran only wants nuclear power for peaceful purposes ( rolls eyes ) there 's keeping an open mind , and then there 's a giant chasm of gullibilityto entertain the notion that the chinese government is not attacking chinese human rights activists through electronic means is stupefyingly naive</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and iran only wants nuclear power for peaceful purposes(rolls eyes)there's keeping an open mind, and then there's a giant chasm of gullibilityto entertain the notion that the chinese government is not attacking chinese human rights activists through electronic means is stupefyingly naive</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894120</id>
	<title>Living in a bubble.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264450620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So remind me again why haven't we "cut the cables" to china again? they WANT to be culturally isolated, they want nothing to do with "western filth and smut" they want thier puritanical culture of blissful ignorance to the atrocities being committed in the name of control and order.  So why not just cut off the internet, cut off trade, and let them live in thier own little bubble?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So remind me again why have n't we " cut the cables " to china again ?
they WANT to be culturally isolated , they want nothing to do with " western filth and smut " they want thier puritanical culture of blissful ignorance to the atrocities being committed in the name of control and order .
So why not just cut off the internet , cut off trade , and let them live in thier own little bubble ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So remind me again why haven't we "cut the cables" to china again?
they WANT to be culturally isolated, they want nothing to do with "western filth and smut" they want thier puritanical culture of blissful ignorance to the atrocities being committed in the name of control and order.
So why not just cut off the internet, cut off trade, and let them live in thier own little bubble?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30895154</id>
	<title>news?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264411560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chinese Human Rights Orgs Hit By Electric Baton</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese Human Rights Orgs Hit By Electric Baton</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese Human Rights Orgs Hit By Electric Baton</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893488</id>
	<title>Re:One day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264447560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Chinese and the Americans will get together and blame the 'Terrorists' while continuing to eleminate human rights?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese and the Americans will get together and blame the 'Terrorists ' while continuing to eleminate human rights ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese and the Americans will get together and blame the 'Terrorists' while continuing to eleminate human rights?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893036</id>
	<title>consequence of "free trade"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264445700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we've traded freedom for cheap junk from wal mart.</p><p>welcome to the bush/obama new world order.</p><p>China can sell stuff here but your blog can not be read in China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we 've traded freedom for cheap junk from wal mart.welcome to the bush/obama new world order.China can sell stuff here but your blog can not be read in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we've traded freedom for cheap junk from wal mart.welcome to the bush/obama new world order.China can sell stuff here but your blog can not be read in China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896994</id>
	<title>Ethnic nationalism is a contagious mental desease</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264418700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And should be treated as such.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And should be treated as such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And should be treated as such.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893658</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1264448220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country, it would be insane.</p></div><p>China has the world's largest standing army.<br>It really wouldn't be much trouble for them to occupy their own country.<br>Particularly in light of China's strict control of domestic ammunition and arms sales:<br>Buying and selling weapons/ammo leads to jail time or the death sentence.</p><p>So to answer your question, a Chinese revolt would be a disaster.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country , it would be insane.China has the world 's largest standing army.It really would n't be much trouble for them to occupy their own country.Particularly in light of China 's strict control of domestic ammunition and arms sales : Buying and selling weapons/ammo leads to jail time or the death sentence.So to answer your question , a Chinese revolt would be a disaster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country, it would be insane.China has the world's largest standing army.It really wouldn't be much trouble for them to occupy their own country.Particularly in light of China's strict control of domestic ammunition and arms sales:Buying and selling weapons/ammo leads to jail time or the death sentence.So to answer your question, a Chinese revolt would be a disaster.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1264443660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would they revolt?<br>The have it better now than anytime in their history. Sure a few may come to the US and the EU but they will see the improvements that they have been making over time and expect them to continue.</p><p>Not to mention that they are proud that went from being a third world nation to a super power in a generation.<br>I don't like the way things work in China but if you look back to how they worked before I think you will see that a DOS and great firewall are progress compared to the cultural revolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would they revolt ? The have it better now than anytime in their history .
Sure a few may come to the US and the EU but they will see the improvements that they have been making over time and expect them to continue.Not to mention that they are proud that went from being a third world nation to a super power in a generation.I do n't like the way things work in China but if you look back to how they worked before I think you will see that a DOS and great firewall are progress compared to the cultural revolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would they revolt?The have it better now than anytime in their history.
Sure a few may come to the US and the EU but they will see the improvements that they have been making over time and expect them to continue.Not to mention that they are proud that went from being a third world nation to a super power in a generation.I don't like the way things work in China but if you look back to how they worked before I think you will see that a DOS and great firewall are progress compared to the cultural revolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896522</id>
	<title>"advocacy group"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264416780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Web site of Chinese Human Rights Defenders, an advocacy group, was hit by a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>The group said it could not confirm the origin of the attackers <b>but called the Chinese government the most likely suspect</b>.</p></div><p>I applaud advocacy groups who are uniquely acquitted to not only advocate but also possess the secondary capability of network sleuthing.</p><p>Although some evidence/proof wouldn't hurt their bold assertion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Web site of Chinese Human Rights Defenders , an advocacy group , was hit by a distributed denial of service ( DDoS ) attack ...The group said it could not confirm the origin of the attackers but called the Chinese government the most likely suspect.I applaud advocacy groups who are uniquely acquitted to not only advocate but also possess the secondary capability of network sleuthing.Although some evidence/proof would n't hurt their bold assertion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Web site of Chinese Human Rights Defenders, an advocacy group, was hit by a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack ...The group said it could not confirm the origin of the attackers but called the Chinese government the most likely suspect.I applaud advocacy groups who are uniquely acquitted to not only advocate but also possess the secondary capability of network sleuthing.Although some evidence/proof wouldn't hurt their bold assertion.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892442</id>
	<title>The Difference</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1264443180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>thrown into mental hospitals where they were forced onto medication or beaten with electric batons</p></div><p>Whereas in America <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">they just do it to you in public</a> [youtube.com].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>thrown into mental hospitals where they were forced onto medication or beaten with electric batonsWhereas in America they just do it to you in public [ youtube.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>thrown into mental hospitals where they were forced onto medication or beaten with electric batonsWhereas in America they just do it to you in public [youtube.com].
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892486</id>
	<title>Getting rid of pesky pests</title>
	<author>olborro</author>
	<datestamp>1264443360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, if it worked with Google, why not try that with human rights organizations?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , if it worked with Google , why not try that with human rights organizations ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, if it worked with Google, why not try that with human rights organizations?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897484</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>sillybilly</author>
	<datestamp>1264421400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not the tv shows. Even without the tv shows, as long as people have a roof over their heads and have theirs stomachs filled, as long as there is some sense of security, there is not gonna be revolts. Why would there be? Even if you lose your job you can go on welfare and get a place to sleep and food.  If anything, the only people I imagine feeling totally rebellious are military personnel, fighting a bullshit war they don't believe in, but as long as there is a voluntary army, kind of a mercenary army, where you don't have to be there unless you sign up to take orders, in exchange for pay, scolarships and early retirement, and to feel useful defending your country and people, rebellion is unlikely too. If there was mandatory conscription, and people shipped off overseas against their own will, now you're talking. One can say faced with the choice of going on welfare and getting your expenses nitpicked by govt bureaucrats vs. signing up for the military because there are no jobs, well, it's not mandatory, but halfway there. Everyone likes to feel useful, like they are living for or doing something worthwhile. Though often we have to settle for total useless and bs activities just to deal with the circumstances, such as paying bills, and one can call those things "entertainment" to those who are willing to pay for something you absolutely feel useless doing. Money comes from other people, one way or another you have to please another person to get it, it's entertainment of someone else one way or another, unless you're on welfare. Even then it's pleasing someone else to know that you're not suffering.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not the tv shows .
Even without the tv shows , as long as people have a roof over their heads and have theirs stomachs filled , as long as there is some sense of security , there is not gon na be revolts .
Why would there be ?
Even if you lose your job you can go on welfare and get a place to sleep and food .
If anything , the only people I imagine feeling totally rebellious are military personnel , fighting a bullshit war they do n't believe in , but as long as there is a voluntary army , kind of a mercenary army , where you do n't have to be there unless you sign up to take orders , in exchange for pay , scolarships and early retirement , and to feel useful defending your country and people , rebellion is unlikely too .
If there was mandatory conscription , and people shipped off overseas against their own will , now you 're talking .
One can say faced with the choice of going on welfare and getting your expenses nitpicked by govt bureaucrats vs. signing up for the military because there are no jobs , well , it 's not mandatory , but halfway there .
Everyone likes to feel useful , like they are living for or doing something worthwhile .
Though often we have to settle for total useless and bs activities just to deal with the circumstances , such as paying bills , and one can call those things " entertainment " to those who are willing to pay for something you absolutely feel useless doing .
Money comes from other people , one way or another you have to please another person to get it , it 's entertainment of someone else one way or another , unless you 're on welfare .
Even then it 's pleasing someone else to know that you 're not suffering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not the tv shows.
Even without the tv shows, as long as people have a roof over their heads and have theirs stomachs filled, as long as there is some sense of security, there is not gonna be revolts.
Why would there be?
Even if you lose your job you can go on welfare and get a place to sleep and food.
If anything, the only people I imagine feeling totally rebellious are military personnel, fighting a bullshit war they don't believe in, but as long as there is a voluntary army, kind of a mercenary army, where you don't have to be there unless you sign up to take orders, in exchange for pay, scolarships and early retirement, and to feel useful defending your country and people, rebellion is unlikely too.
If there was mandatory conscription, and people shipped off overseas against their own will, now you're talking.
One can say faced with the choice of going on welfare and getting your expenses nitpicked by govt bureaucrats vs. signing up for the military because there are no jobs, well, it's not mandatory, but halfway there.
Everyone likes to feel useful, like they are living for or doing something worthwhile.
Though often we have to settle for total useless and bs activities just to deal with the circumstances, such as paying bills, and one can call those things "entertainment" to those who are willing to pay for something you absolutely feel useless doing.
Money comes from other people, one way or another you have to please another person to get it, it's entertainment of someone else one way or another, unless you're on welfare.
Even then it's pleasing someone else to know that you're not suffering.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892462</id>
	<title>Re:One day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264443240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nazi Germany?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nazi Germany ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nazi Germany?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894970</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264410720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give em a chair already!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give em a chair already !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give em a chair already!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892990</id>
	<title>Not surprising</title>
	<author>Brazilian Geek</author>
	<datestamp>1264445460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China is giving the world the middle finger and not giving a shit about the repercussions.</p><p>Face it, corporations are hungry for dollars and one of the only markets left for them is China and the whole Google thing proved that it doesn't matter what China does, the corporations are going to fall in line and obediently do what China wants of them.  Of all the companies affected by the breech only Google has spoken out - the rest are quiet and will remain so in fear of losing precious Chinese business.</p><p>China has seen that it has nothing to fear from the corporate world - the ones that give them money.  They'll do whatever they want now - taking down sites and silencing opposition will only be met with silence and their homeland population is so docile that they'll never revolt so why the fuck should they care.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is giving the world the middle finger and not giving a shit about the repercussions.Face it , corporations are hungry for dollars and one of the only markets left for them is China and the whole Google thing proved that it does n't matter what China does , the corporations are going to fall in line and obediently do what China wants of them .
Of all the companies affected by the breech only Google has spoken out - the rest are quiet and will remain so in fear of losing precious Chinese business.China has seen that it has nothing to fear from the corporate world - the ones that give them money .
They 'll do whatever they want now - taking down sites and silencing opposition will only be met with silence and their homeland population is so docile that they 'll never revolt so why the fuck should they care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is giving the world the middle finger and not giving a shit about the repercussions.Face it, corporations are hungry for dollars and one of the only markets left for them is China and the whole Google thing proved that it doesn't matter what China does, the corporations are going to fall in line and obediently do what China wants of them.
Of all the companies affected by the breech only Google has spoken out - the rest are quiet and will remain so in fear of losing precious Chinese business.China has seen that it has nothing to fear from the corporate world - the ones that give them money.
They'll do whatever they want now - taking down sites and silencing opposition will only be met with silence and their homeland population is so docile that they'll never revolt so why the fuck should they care.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892830</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Jenming</author>
	<datestamp>1264444680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China was a second world country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China was a second world country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China was a second world country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386</id>
	<title>Looking for a fight in all the wrong places.</title>
	<author>DigiShaman</author>
	<datestamp>1264443060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really hope this DDoS is not being sponsored by the CCP. I mean seriously, do they *want* to piss off the world? If this doesn't unite black-hats, I don't know what would. I stupid can a government be?!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hope this DDoS is not being sponsored by the CCP .
I mean seriously , do they * want * to piss off the world ?
If this does n't unite black-hats , I do n't know what would .
I stupid can a government be ? !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hope this DDoS is not being sponsored by the CCP.
I mean seriously, do they *want* to piss off the world?
If this doesn't unite black-hats, I don't know what would.
I stupid can a government be?!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892362</id>
	<title>It serves then right.</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1264443000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those damn Liberal Commies...   Uhh.. Wait.. Ummm.......</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those damn Liberal Commies... Uhh.. Wait.. Ummm...... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those damn Liberal Commies...   Uhh.. Wait.. Ummm.......</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30895744</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>john8-32</author>
	<datestamp>1264413960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Revelation 9--
Well..these being the latter days? Eschatology tells us in God's Word that China
will gather together a great massive army-( I think it is the 2 million spoke of in
Revelation)- they will be demonically motivated to go against the nation Israel as
will every other nation on earth--what saves the Jews-as it did in Egypt when God
called them out through Moses-what saves them is that they will cry out to the Lord
top come and when they look on Him Who was pierced-and in Whom their forefathers
denied? They will at first grieve for not believing Jesus is exactly Who He said He
 is over 2,000 years ago. He is GOD in the flesh. Here is the Chapter of scripture
 from Revelation that speaks of the 2 million<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:Revelation 9

The Fifth Trumpet
The fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to
earth.  The key to the shaft of the abyss was given to him. He opened the shaft of
 the abyss, and smoke came up out of the shaft like smoke from a great  furnace so
that the sun and the air were darkened by the smoke from the shaft. Then out of the
 smoke locusts came to the earth, and power was given to them  like the power that
scorpions have on the earth.  They were told not to harm the grass of the earth, or
 any green plant, or any tree, but only people who do not have God's seal on their
foreheads. They were not permitted to kill them, but were to torment [them] for five
 months; their torment is like the torment caused by a scorpion when it strikes a
man. In those days people will seek death and will not find it; they will long to
die, but death will flee from them.

The appearance of the locusts was like horses equipped for battle.  On their heads
were something like gold crowns; their faces were like men's faces; they had hair
 like women's hair; their teeth were like lions' teeth;  they had chests like iron
 breastplates; the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots with many
 horses rushing into battle; and they had tails with stingers, like scorpions, so
 that with their tails they had the power  to harm people for five months. They had
 as their king  the angel of the abyss; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek
 he has the name Apollyon. The first woe has passed. There are still two more woes
to come after this.

The Sixth Trumpet
 The sixth angel blew his trumpet. From the four [g] horns of the gold altar  that
 is before God, I heard a voice 14 say to the sixth angel who had the trumpet,
 "Release the four angels bound at the great river Euphrates."  So the four angels
who were prepared for the hour, day, month, and year were released to kill a third
of the human race. The number of mounted troops was 200 million;  I heard their
number. This is how I saw the horses in my vision: The horsemen had breastplates
 that were fiery red, hyacinth blue, and sulfur yellow. The heads of the horses
were like lions' heads, and from their mouths came fire, smoke, and sulfur. A third
 of the human race was killed by these three plagues&mdash;by the fire, the smoke, and
the sulfur that came from their mouths.  For the power of the horses is in their
 mouths and in their tails, because their tails, like snakes, have heads, and they
inflict injury with them.

The rest of the people, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the
 works of their hands to stop worshiping demons  and idols of gold, silver, bronze,
 stone, and wood, which are not able to see, hear, or walk. And they did not repent
 of their murders, their sorceries, their sexual immorality, or their thefts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Revelation 9-- Well..these being the latter days ?
Eschatology tells us in God 's Word that China will gather together a great massive army- ( I think it is the 2 million spoke of in Revelation ) - they will be demonically motivated to go against the nation Israel as will every other nation on earth--what saves the Jews-as it did in Egypt when God called them out through Moses-what saves them is that they will cry out to the Lord top come and when they look on Him Who was pierced-and in Whom their forefathers denied ?
They will at first grieve for not believing Jesus is exactly Who He said He is over 2,000 years ago .
He is GOD in the flesh .
Here is the Chapter of scripture from Revelation that speaks of the 2 million : Revelation 9 The Fifth Trumpet The fifth angel blew his trumpet , and I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to earth .
The key to the shaft of the abyss was given to him .
He opened the shaft of the abyss , and smoke came up out of the shaft like smoke from a great furnace so that the sun and the air were darkened by the smoke from the shaft .
Then out of the smoke locusts came to the earth , and power was given to them like the power that scorpions have on the earth .
They were told not to harm the grass of the earth , or any green plant , or any tree , but only people who do not have God 's seal on their foreheads .
They were not permitted to kill them , but were to torment [ them ] for five months ; their torment is like the torment caused by a scorpion when it strikes a man .
In those days people will seek death and will not find it ; they will long to die , but death will flee from them .
The appearance of the locusts was like horses equipped for battle .
On their heads were something like gold crowns ; their faces were like men 's faces ; they had hair like women 's hair ; their teeth were like lions ' teeth ; they had chests like iron breastplates ; the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots with many horses rushing into battle ; and they had tails with stingers , like scorpions , so that with their tails they had the power to harm people for five months .
They had as their king the angel of the abyss ; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon , and in Greek he has the name Apollyon .
The first woe has passed .
There are still two more woes to come after this .
The Sixth Trumpet The sixth angel blew his trumpet .
From the four [ g ] horns of the gold altar that is before God , I heard a voice 14 say to the sixth angel who had the trumpet , " Release the four angels bound at the great river Euphrates .
" So the four angels who were prepared for the hour , day , month , and year were released to kill a third of the human race .
The number of mounted troops was 200 million ; I heard their number .
This is how I saw the horses in my vision : The horsemen had breastplates that were fiery red , hyacinth blue , and sulfur yellow .
The heads of the horses were like lions ' heads , and from their mouths came fire , smoke , and sulfur .
A third of the human race was killed by these three plagues    by the fire , the smoke , and the sulfur that came from their mouths .
For the power of the horses is in their mouths and in their tails , because their tails , like snakes , have heads , and they inflict injury with them .
The rest of the people , who were not killed by these plagues , did not repent of the works of their hands to stop worshiping demons and idols of gold , silver , bronze , stone , and wood , which are not able to see , hear , or walk .
And they did not repent of their murders , their sorceries , their sexual immorality , or their thefts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Revelation 9--
Well..these being the latter days?
Eschatology tells us in God's Word that China
will gather together a great massive army-( I think it is the 2 million spoke of in
Revelation)- they will be demonically motivated to go against the nation Israel as
will every other nation on earth--what saves the Jews-as it did in Egypt when God
called them out through Moses-what saves them is that they will cry out to the Lord
top come and when they look on Him Who was pierced-and in Whom their forefathers
denied?
They will at first grieve for not believing Jesus is exactly Who He said He
 is over 2,000 years ago.
He is GOD in the flesh.
Here is the Chapter of scripture
 from Revelation that speaks of the 2 million :Revelation 9

The Fifth Trumpet
The fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to
earth.
The key to the shaft of the abyss was given to him.
He opened the shaft of
 the abyss, and smoke came up out of the shaft like smoke from a great  furnace so
that the sun and the air were darkened by the smoke from the shaft.
Then out of the
 smoke locusts came to the earth, and power was given to them  like the power that
scorpions have on the earth.
They were told not to harm the grass of the earth, or
 any green plant, or any tree, but only people who do not have God's seal on their
foreheads.
They were not permitted to kill them, but were to torment [them] for five
 months; their torment is like the torment caused by a scorpion when it strikes a
man.
In those days people will seek death and will not find it; they will long to
die, but death will flee from them.
The appearance of the locusts was like horses equipped for battle.
On their heads
were something like gold crowns; their faces were like men's faces; they had hair
 like women's hair; their teeth were like lions' teeth;  they had chests like iron
 breastplates; the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots with many
 horses rushing into battle; and they had tails with stingers, like scorpions, so
 that with their tails they had the power  to harm people for five months.
They had
 as their king  the angel of the abyss; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek
 he has the name Apollyon.
The first woe has passed.
There are still two more woes
to come after this.
The Sixth Trumpet
 The sixth angel blew his trumpet.
From the four [g] horns of the gold altar  that
 is before God, I heard a voice 14 say to the sixth angel who had the trumpet,
 "Release the four angels bound at the great river Euphrates.
"  So the four angels
who were prepared for the hour, day, month, and year were released to kill a third
of the human race.
The number of mounted troops was 200 million;  I heard their
number.
This is how I saw the horses in my vision: The horsemen had breastplates
 that were fiery red, hyacinth blue, and sulfur yellow.
The heads of the horses
were like lions' heads, and from their mouths came fire, smoke, and sulfur.
A third
 of the human race was killed by these three plagues—by the fire, the smoke, and
the sulfur that came from their mouths.
For the power of the horses is in their
 mouths and in their tails, because their tails, like snakes, have heads, and they
inflict injury with them.
The rest of the people, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the
 works of their hands to stop worshiping demons  and idols of gold, silver, bronze,
 stone, and wood, which are not able to see, hear, or walk.
And they did not repent
 of their murders, their sorceries, their sexual immorality, or their thefts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>denis-The-menace</author>
	<datestamp>1264443000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts don't happen.</p><p>It works great in developed countries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts do n't happen.It works great in developed countries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts don't happen.It works great in developed countries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893288</id>
	<title>Re:Unlikely but possible alternative</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1264446840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The DDOS wouldn't have to be anti Human Rights, who cares if their page is down for a few days or even a month that's not going to stop the Human Rights people</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The DDOS would n't have to be anti Human Rights , who cares if their page is down for a few days or even a month that 's not going to stop the Human Rights people</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The DDOS wouldn't have to be anti Human Rights, who cares if their page is down for a few days or even a month that's not going to stop the Human Rights people</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896954</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anachragnome</author>
	<datestamp>1264418460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am getting sick and tired of all the people I hear complaining about China and it's human rights abuses.</p><p>Why? Because whining does nothing. Our government does nothing. Forcing their hand, ala Google, does nothing.</p><p>So what to do? DO IT YOURSELF! STOP BUYING CHINESE PRODUCTS until they change their policies. Money is all they will respond to (or rather the lack of it). Just because our government treats China with "Most Favored" trading status doesn't mean WE have to.</p><p>It really is as simple as flipping over a product, looking for the sticker that says "Made in China" and putting the thing back on the shelf if the sticker is there.</p><p>And please, don't give me any guff about "Think about the poor peasants with no money to buy food because we don't buy their products!" Ask any dissident what they think about that. I sure most would agree that you don't get major changes in government without paying the piper.</p><p>So, continue the complaining, but at least back it up with some effort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am getting sick and tired of all the people I hear complaining about China and it 's human rights abuses.Why ?
Because whining does nothing .
Our government does nothing .
Forcing their hand , ala Google , does nothing.So what to do ?
DO IT YOURSELF !
STOP BUYING CHINESE PRODUCTS until they change their policies .
Money is all they will respond to ( or rather the lack of it ) .
Just because our government treats China with " Most Favored " trading status does n't mean WE have to.It really is as simple as flipping over a product , looking for the sticker that says " Made in China " and putting the thing back on the shelf if the sticker is there.And please , do n't give me any guff about " Think about the poor peasants with no money to buy food because we do n't buy their products !
" Ask any dissident what they think about that .
I sure most would agree that you do n't get major changes in government without paying the piper.So , continue the complaining , but at least back it up with some effort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am getting sick and tired of all the people I hear complaining about China and it's human rights abuses.Why?
Because whining does nothing.
Our government does nothing.
Forcing their hand, ala Google, does nothing.So what to do?
DO IT YOURSELF!
STOP BUYING CHINESE PRODUCTS until they change their policies.
Money is all they will respond to (or rather the lack of it).
Just because our government treats China with "Most Favored" trading status doesn't mean WE have to.It really is as simple as flipping over a product, looking for the sticker that says "Made in China" and putting the thing back on the shelf if the sticker is there.And please, don't give me any guff about "Think about the poor peasants with no money to buy food because we don't buy their products!
" Ask any dissident what they think about that.
I sure most would agree that you don't get major changes in government without paying the piper.So, continue the complaining, but at least back it up with some effort.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897994</id>
	<title>Re:But... but hacking is ILLEGAL in China!</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1264423860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is perhaps instructive to remember that it was not so long ago that China considered itself the center of the "celestial universe" and all outsiders as "barbarians". It is not difficult to guess, given this cultural context, how the Chinese feel about criticism of their "enlightened" ways. Times may have changed, but cultural sensitivities die very hard in China.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is perhaps instructive to remember that it was not so long ago that China considered itself the center of the " celestial universe " and all outsiders as " barbarians " .
It is not difficult to guess , given this cultural context , how the Chinese feel about criticism of their " enlightened " ways .
Times may have changed , but cultural sensitivities die very hard in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is perhaps instructive to remember that it was not so long ago that China considered itself the center of the "celestial universe" and all outsiders as "barbarians".
It is not difficult to guess, given this cultural context, how the Chinese feel about criticism of their "enlightened" ways.
Times may have changed, but cultural sensitivities die very hard in China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892650</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1264443840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It could just as well be anyone else, even US gov to try to get people to blame China. Maybe it actually does have something to do with the fact that China isn't loaning so much money to US anymore and as an answer they're trying to make Chinese look bad. Maybe Google is in this plan too!</p><p>Yeah, anyone can throw in all kinds of theories, but we don't really know. It could just as likely be anyone else, even someone who just does it fun to see all these news around the internet.</p><p>Comment from article:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It's useless to ask the chinese government if they're responsible because the timing makes it so obvious they would feel it was pointless to admit it, It's just too obvious</p></div><p>Yeah right. Too obvious, so it must be Chinese.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It could just as well be anyone else , even US gov to try to get people to blame China .
Maybe it actually does have something to do with the fact that China is n't loaning so much money to US anymore and as an answer they 're trying to make Chinese look bad .
Maybe Google is in this plan too ! Yeah , anyone can throw in all kinds of theories , but we do n't really know .
It could just as likely be anyone else , even someone who just does it fun to see all these news around the internet.Comment from article : It 's useless to ask the chinese government if they 're responsible because the timing makes it so obvious they would feel it was pointless to admit it , It 's just too obviousYeah right .
Too obvious , so it must be Chinese .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could just as well be anyone else, even US gov to try to get people to blame China.
Maybe it actually does have something to do with the fact that China isn't loaning so much money to US anymore and as an answer they're trying to make Chinese look bad.
Maybe Google is in this plan too!Yeah, anyone can throw in all kinds of theories, but we don't really know.
It could just as likely be anyone else, even someone who just does it fun to see all these news around the internet.Comment from article:It's useless to ask the chinese government if they're responsible because the timing makes it so obvious they would feel it was pointless to admit it, It's just too obviousYeah right.
Too obvious, so it must be Chinese.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893854</id>
	<title>srsly guys</title>
	<author>eexaa</author>
	<datestamp>1264449360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why don't we just disconnect China?</p><p>I mean it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't we just disconnect China ? I mean it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't we just disconnect China?I mean it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896506</id>
	<title>Re:Looking for a fight in all the wrong places.</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1264416720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think a bunch of hackers are going to take down the Chinese government, even ignoring the little detail that they have a few million of their own. What would make a difference is if western consumers stopped buying from them. Would you pay twice as much for your consumer goods to help bring about a more open China? Didn't think so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think a bunch of hackers are going to take down the Chinese government , even ignoring the little detail that they have a few million of their own .
What would make a difference is if western consumers stopped buying from them .
Would you pay twice as much for your consumer goods to help bring about a more open China ?
Did n't think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think a bunch of hackers are going to take down the Chinese government, even ignoring the little detail that they have a few million of their own.
What would make a difference is if western consumers stopped buying from them.
Would you pay twice as much for your consumer goods to help bring about a more open China?
Didn't think so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892946</id>
	<title>Shouldn't it read:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264445220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Chinese Human Rights Orgs Hit By DDoS Again"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Chinese Human Rights Orgs Hit By DDoS Again " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Chinese Human Rights Orgs Hit By DDoS Again"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894706</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1264453080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, imagine if the Chinese people, not government were actually smart, hell, they would calculate that the population vs. amount of military is like 1000 to 1....really no contest if the people wanted to stop their oppressors, but that would be if they were smart enough to pull something off like that, I think the Philippines did something similar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , imagine if the Chinese people , not government were actually smart , hell , they would calculate that the population vs. amount of military is like 1000 to 1....really no contest if the people wanted to stop their oppressors , but that would be if they were smart enough to pull something off like that , I think the Philippines did something similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, imagine if the Chinese people, not government were actually smart, hell, they would calculate that the population vs. amount of military is like 1000 to 1....really no contest if the people wanted to stop their oppressors, but that would be if they were smart enough to pull something off like that, I think the Philippines did something similar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</id>
	<title>Seriously?</title>
	<author>Pojut</author>
	<datestamp>1264442820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Think it was the chinese again?</p><p>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country, it would be insane.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think it was the chinese again ? I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country , it would be insane .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think it was the chinese again?I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country, it would be insane.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893052</id>
	<title>But... but hacking is ILLEGAL in China!</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1264445760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shame on you, shame! Bad China! Go sit in a corner.</p><p>Oh, you don't want to sit in the corner?</p><p>You're angry we called you bad?</p><p>We're so sorry, we won't say it again. We beg your forgiveness.</p><p>-Signed, the International Community.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shame on you , shame !
Bad China !
Go sit in a corner.Oh , you do n't want to sit in the corner ? You 're angry we called you bad ? We 're so sorry , we wo n't say it again .
We beg your forgiveness.-Signed , the International Community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shame on you, shame!
Bad China!
Go sit in a corner.Oh, you don't want to sit in the corner?You're angry we called you bad?We're so sorry, we won't say it again.
We beg your forgiveness.-Signed, the International Community.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898362</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1264425480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> That really kind of defeats the purpose of paying people slave wages of cents per hour in the first place. So yeah, provide them with TV, a three bedroom furnished house, a fridge full of food, a garage with a car in it, comfortable clothing and of course reasonable working conditions, hmm, well that's why the middle class fought for a reasonable wages in the first place. </p><p> You can't really pacify people while exploiting them, at least not without drugs and, those drugs that leave them happy while still able to work can produce unreliable 'revolutionary' consequences. They have pushed that exploitation about as far as it can go and the Chinese factory workforce are starting to realise there is no escape from those extreme work conditions or the pathetic remuneration, not for them nor their children. As the greedy who created conditions, have always done, once the conditions are in place they will never ever let them go unless they are forced to and they will violently and brutally resist all attempts of peaceful reform. </p><p> So censorship, disruption of communications, isolation of groups, random arbitrary arrests, abuse with in the detention system are all the markers of increasing levels of violence being used by those in control, forcefully attempting to resist reasonable reforms. Either they reform, or the violence they use to halt change will forment greater violence in return. Of course greed is blind and stupid and what should be logically avoided, instead is being actively advanced.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That really kind of defeats the purpose of paying people slave wages of cents per hour in the first place .
So yeah , provide them with TV , a three bedroom furnished house , a fridge full of food , a garage with a car in it , comfortable clothing and of course reasonable working conditions , hmm , well that 's why the middle class fought for a reasonable wages in the first place .
You ca n't really pacify people while exploiting them , at least not without drugs and , those drugs that leave them happy while still able to work can produce unreliable 'revolutionary ' consequences .
They have pushed that exploitation about as far as it can go and the Chinese factory workforce are starting to realise there is no escape from those extreme work conditions or the pathetic remuneration , not for them nor their children .
As the greedy who created conditions , have always done , once the conditions are in place they will never ever let them go unless they are forced to and they will violently and brutally resist all attempts of peaceful reform .
So censorship , disruption of communications , isolation of groups , random arbitrary arrests , abuse with in the detention system are all the markers of increasing levels of violence being used by those in control , forcefully attempting to resist reasonable reforms .
Either they reform , or the violence they use to halt change will forment greater violence in return .
Of course greed is blind and stupid and what should be logically avoided , instead is being actively advanced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> That really kind of defeats the purpose of paying people slave wages of cents per hour in the first place.
So yeah, provide them with TV, a three bedroom furnished house, a fridge full of food, a garage with a car in it, comfortable clothing and of course reasonable working conditions, hmm, well that's why the middle class fought for a reasonable wages in the first place.
You can't really pacify people while exploiting them, at least not without drugs and, those drugs that leave them happy while still able to work can produce unreliable 'revolutionary' consequences.
They have pushed that exploitation about as far as it can go and the Chinese factory workforce are starting to realise there is no escape from those extreme work conditions or the pathetic remuneration, not for them nor their children.
As the greedy who created conditions, have always done, once the conditions are in place they will never ever let them go unless they are forced to and they will violently and brutally resist all attempts of peaceful reform.
So censorship, disruption of communications, isolation of groups, random arbitrary arrests, abuse with in the detention system are all the markers of increasing levels of violence being used by those in control, forcefully attempting to resist reasonable reforms.
Either they reform, or the violence they use to halt change will forment greater violence in return.
Of course greed is blind and stupid and what should be logically avoided, instead is being actively advanced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894328</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264451460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While there were many facets of Soviet life that were anything but perfect, it is simple ignorance to say "some people were better off, but most were either in the same position they were in before the revolution or in an even worse position as a result of the government's policies". The majority of people before the revolution (alright, go back 20 years or so before for more really nasty stuff) were basically slaves. They had very limited access to education and healthcare, and almost no social mobility. For long periods in the Soviet Union, at least after Stalin was gone, people had almost 100\% access to education and healthcare. I don't know that stats on pre-revolution literacy, but I do know that even now literacy in the former USSR countries is higher than some "first world" countries.<br>I lived in Russia for about a year and a half, and the family where I stayed for the first year was an excellent example of the good things about the USSR - the dad was a physics researcher, and got his 180 rubles/m and the mum a biology researcher on 160 or something like that. With the extras they got from work that they were able barter, it led to a comfortable life. They had very high quality healthcare, education and (non-political) cultural activities. They couldn't afford a car but had literally no use for one - public transport was so good, and dirt cheap. Life was not filled with luxuries but everything was taken care of, and there was plenty of spare time. What about now? The dad is working *double* shifts at a secondary school and spending nights and weekends writing exams for private tertiary institutions, the mum is working as a seamstress and gets paid once every three months or so, and sometimes in things like fish! So they have FAR less disposable income than before. AND they have no politcal freedom! If you look at the reality of how corruption has got so much nastier in Russia than it was before (it's always been there, now it's just extremely nasty), then the quality of life of MOST people is well below what it was after about the 1960s. Hell, look at the average life expectancy of males in Russia since it's peak of around 1985 just before the collapse and what it is now, at one point more than 20 years was shaved off the high point!<br>A++</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While there were many facets of Soviet life that were anything but perfect , it is simple ignorance to say " some people were better off , but most were either in the same position they were in before the revolution or in an even worse position as a result of the government 's policies " .
The majority of people before the revolution ( alright , go back 20 years or so before for more really nasty stuff ) were basically slaves .
They had very limited access to education and healthcare , and almost no social mobility .
For long periods in the Soviet Union , at least after Stalin was gone , people had almost 100 \ % access to education and healthcare .
I do n't know that stats on pre-revolution literacy , but I do know that even now literacy in the former USSR countries is higher than some " first world " countries.I lived in Russia for about a year and a half , and the family where I stayed for the first year was an excellent example of the good things about the USSR - the dad was a physics researcher , and got his 180 rubles/m and the mum a biology researcher on 160 or something like that .
With the extras they got from work that they were able barter , it led to a comfortable life .
They had very high quality healthcare , education and ( non-political ) cultural activities .
They could n't afford a car but had literally no use for one - public transport was so good , and dirt cheap .
Life was not filled with luxuries but everything was taken care of , and there was plenty of spare time .
What about now ?
The dad is working * double * shifts at a secondary school and spending nights and weekends writing exams for private tertiary institutions , the mum is working as a seamstress and gets paid once every three months or so , and sometimes in things like fish !
So they have FAR less disposable income than before .
AND they have no politcal freedom !
If you look at the reality of how corruption has got so much nastier in Russia than it was before ( it 's always been there , now it 's just extremely nasty ) , then the quality of life of MOST people is well below what it was after about the 1960s .
Hell , look at the average life expectancy of males in Russia since it 's peak of around 1985 just before the collapse and what it is now , at one point more than 20 years was shaved off the high point ! A + +</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While there were many facets of Soviet life that were anything but perfect, it is simple ignorance to say "some people were better off, but most were either in the same position they were in before the revolution or in an even worse position as a result of the government's policies".
The majority of people before the revolution (alright, go back 20 years or so before for more really nasty stuff) were basically slaves.
They had very limited access to education and healthcare, and almost no social mobility.
For long periods in the Soviet Union, at least after Stalin was gone, people had almost 100\% access to education and healthcare.
I don't know that stats on pre-revolution literacy, but I do know that even now literacy in the former USSR countries is higher than some "first world" countries.I lived in Russia for about a year and a half, and the family where I stayed for the first year was an excellent example of the good things about the USSR - the dad was a physics researcher, and got his 180 rubles/m and the mum a biology researcher on 160 or something like that.
With the extras they got from work that they were able barter, it led to a comfortable life.
They had very high quality healthcare, education and (non-political) cultural activities.
They couldn't afford a car but had literally no use for one - public transport was so good, and dirt cheap.
Life was not filled with luxuries but everything was taken care of, and there was plenty of spare time.
What about now?
The dad is working *double* shifts at a secondary school and spending nights and weekends writing exams for private tertiary institutions, the mum is working as a seamstress and gets paid once every three months or so, and sometimes in things like fish!
So they have FAR less disposable income than before.
AND they have no politcal freedom!
If you look at the reality of how corruption has got so much nastier in Russia than it was before (it's always been there, now it's just extremely nasty), then the quality of life of MOST people is well below what it was after about the 1960s.
Hell, look at the average life expectancy of males in Russia since it's peak of around 1985 just before the collapse and what it is now, at one point more than 20 years was shaved off the high point!A++</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893564</id>
	<title>But Who?</title>
	<author>Bob9113</author>
	<datestamp>1264447860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is China going on the offensive? It would not be a terribly wrong move, from a warfighting perspective. Give a taste of what real cyberwar looks like, then tell your opponents to stop the pissing and moaning about what they see as reasonable information management.</p><p>But it could also be someone bent on destabilizing China. Pakistan, perhaps. The iron is hot for the striking. Perfect time to try to foment international pressure.</p><p>Or by Chinese dissidents themselves.</p><p>Who can tell?</p><p>Only us. We, information scientists, are the only soldiers that matter in this war.</p><p>We are at the beginning, the very early dawn, of the information age. This is not only true in war but in commerce as well. We are the new gods. Prepare, and begin, to demand your full account.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is China going on the offensive ?
It would not be a terribly wrong move , from a warfighting perspective .
Give a taste of what real cyberwar looks like , then tell your opponents to stop the pissing and moaning about what they see as reasonable information management.But it could also be someone bent on destabilizing China .
Pakistan , perhaps .
The iron is hot for the striking .
Perfect time to try to foment international pressure.Or by Chinese dissidents themselves.Who can tell ? Only us .
We , information scientists , are the only soldiers that matter in this war.We are at the beginning , the very early dawn , of the information age .
This is not only true in war but in commerce as well .
We are the new gods .
Prepare , and begin , to demand your full account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is China going on the offensive?
It would not be a terribly wrong move, from a warfighting perspective.
Give a taste of what real cyberwar looks like, then tell your opponents to stop the pissing and moaning about what they see as reasonable information management.But it could also be someone bent on destabilizing China.
Pakistan, perhaps.
The iron is hot for the striking.
Perfect time to try to foment international pressure.Or by Chinese dissidents themselves.Who can tell?Only us.
We, information scientists, are the only soldiers that matter in this war.We are at the beginning, the very early dawn, of the information age.
This is not only true in war but in commerce as well.
We are the new gods.
Prepare, and begin, to demand your full account.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30900722</id>
	<title>Smoking gun</title>
	<author>alextheseal</author>
	<datestamp>1264445280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As another person pointed out, if the DDOS is coming from China, but the sites are firewalled by the China government then the conclusion is only the China government could be doing it since end users are blocked.

I think the term is hoisted on their own petard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As another person pointed out , if the DDOS is coming from China , but the sites are firewalled by the China government then the conclusion is only the China government could be doing it since end users are blocked .
I think the term is hoisted on their own petard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As another person pointed out, if the DDOS is coming from China, but the sites are firewalled by the China government then the conclusion is only the China government could be doing it since end users are blocked.
I think the term is hoisted on their own petard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892978</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264445460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better than in the Tang or Sun Dinasty?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better than in the Tang or Sun Dinasty ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better than in the Tang or Sun Dinasty?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1264445340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The have it better now than anytime in their history."<br> <br>

<i>Some</i> have it better now.  There are a billion people living in China, and only a minority have access to the improved standards of living that you are referring to.  This is pretty much how things were in the Soviet Union:  some people were better off, but most were either in the same position they were in before the revolution or in an even worse position as a result of the government's policies.<br> <br>

Sorry, I know that the Reagan/Thatcher concept is popular, but increased trade does not always bring a higher standard of living to every single citizen or even to a majority of citizens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The have it better now than anytime in their history .
" Some have it better now .
There are a billion people living in China , and only a minority have access to the improved standards of living that you are referring to .
This is pretty much how things were in the Soviet Union : some people were better off , but most were either in the same position they were in before the revolution or in an even worse position as a result of the government 's policies .
Sorry , I know that the Reagan/Thatcher concept is popular , but increased trade does not always bring a higher standard of living to every single citizen or even to a majority of citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The have it better now than anytime in their history.
" 

Some have it better now.
There are a billion people living in China, and only a minority have access to the improved standards of living that you are referring to.
This is pretty much how things were in the Soviet Union:  some people were better off, but most were either in the same position they were in before the revolution or in an even worse position as a result of the government's policies.
Sorry, I know that the Reagan/Thatcher concept is popular, but increased trade does not always bring a higher standard of living to every single citizen or even to a majority of citizens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892312</id>
	<title>Horsecock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264442820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't believe it's not <a href="http://goatse.fr/" title="goatse.fr" rel="nofollow">horsecock</a> [goatse.fr].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe it 's not horsecock [ goatse.fr ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe it's not horsecock [goatse.fr].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734</id>
	<title>Unlikely but possible alternative</title>
	<author>zmaragdus</author>
	<datestamp>1264444200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One alternative to consider, as unlikely as it may be, is this: China [already] has a really bad rep among the online communities for openness and free speech. Some third party comes along, having assembled a botnet, and wants to further smear China's name. So they tell their botnet to attack the webpages of those who oppose China's rights abuses. The world assumes it was China and hates them all the more.</p><p>Now, before a flood of hate-replies come, let me say a few things. (1) It is less likely than not that the above scenario happened. Anyone wanting to oppose China's rights abuses wouldn't attack those pages. ("The enemy of my enemy is my friend" mentality.) The perpetrator would have to hate China but not care about the rights abuses. (2) I personally think that China is responsible. This post is just a small attempt to keep people thinking rationally instead of letting their emotions take over completely. (3) We probably will never truly figure out who really did it anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One alternative to consider , as unlikely as it may be , is this : China [ already ] has a really bad rep among the online communities for openness and free speech .
Some third party comes along , having assembled a botnet , and wants to further smear China 's name .
So they tell their botnet to attack the webpages of those who oppose China 's rights abuses .
The world assumes it was China and hates them all the more.Now , before a flood of hate-replies come , let me say a few things .
( 1 ) It is less likely than not that the above scenario happened .
Anyone wanting to oppose China 's rights abuses would n't attack those pages .
( " The enemy of my enemy is my friend " mentality .
) The perpetrator would have to hate China but not care about the rights abuses .
( 2 ) I personally think that China is responsible .
This post is just a small attempt to keep people thinking rationally instead of letting their emotions take over completely .
( 3 ) We probably will never truly figure out who really did it anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One alternative to consider, as unlikely as it may be, is this: China [already] has a really bad rep among the online communities for openness and free speech.
Some third party comes along, having assembled a botnet, and wants to further smear China's name.
So they tell their botnet to attack the webpages of those who oppose China's rights abuses.
The world assumes it was China and hates them all the more.Now, before a flood of hate-replies come, let me say a few things.
(1) It is less likely than not that the above scenario happened.
Anyone wanting to oppose China's rights abuses wouldn't attack those pages.
("The enemy of my enemy is my friend" mentality.
) The perpetrator would have to hate China but not care about the rights abuses.
(2) I personally think that China is responsible.
This post is just a small attempt to keep people thinking rationally instead of letting their emotions take over completely.
(3) We probably will never truly figure out who really did it anyways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>ilsaloving</author>
	<datestamp>1264445520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The parent has been marked funny, but I would argue that their statement is more true than most people realize.</p><p>Entertainment has a long history of use by oppressive regimes to give people something easy to focus on, and taking focus away from the terrible policies said regimes put in place.</p><p>Hell, the US has lost so many basic human rights in the last decade, that I'm amazed a civil war *didn't* break out.  But hey... as long as people get to have their reality TV shows, it's all good, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The parent has been marked funny , but I would argue that their statement is more true than most people realize.Entertainment has a long history of use by oppressive regimes to give people something easy to focus on , and taking focus away from the terrible policies said regimes put in place.Hell , the US has lost so many basic human rights in the last decade , that I 'm amazed a civil war * did n't * break out .
But hey... as long as people get to have their reality TV shows , it 's all good , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The parent has been marked funny, but I would argue that their statement is more true than most people realize.Entertainment has a long history of use by oppressive regimes to give people something easy to focus on, and taking focus away from the terrible policies said regimes put in place.Hell, the US has lost so many basic human rights in the last decade, that I'm amazed a civil war *didn't* break out.
But hey... as long as people get to have their reality TV shows, it's all good, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893666</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>hey</author>
	<datestamp>1264448280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be a People's Revolution.  Possibly by a People's Revolutionary Army.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be a People 's Revolution .
Possibly by a People 's Revolutionary Army .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be a People's Revolution.
Possibly by a People's Revolutionary Army.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30895222</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1264411920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Hell, the US has lost so many basic human rights in the last decade, that I'm amazed a civil war *didn't* break out. But hey... as long as people get to have their reality TV shows, it's all good, right?</i></p><p>Or, you know, maybe it's not as bad as you like to believe it is.  I mean, FFS, the US may have it's problems, but let's face it, it ain't fucking China.</p><p>But you're right, that can't be it.  Clearly you're the enlightened one, therefore it *must* be TV...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell , the US has lost so many basic human rights in the last decade , that I 'm amazed a civil war * did n't * break out .
But hey... as long as people get to have their reality TV shows , it 's all good , right ? Or , you know , maybe it 's not as bad as you like to believe it is .
I mean , FFS , the US may have it 's problems , but let 's face it , it ai n't fucking China.But you 're right , that ca n't be it .
Clearly you 're the enlightened one , therefore it * must * be TV.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell, the US has lost so many basic human rights in the last decade, that I'm amazed a civil war *didn't* break out.
But hey... as long as people get to have their reality TV shows, it's all good, right?Or, you know, maybe it's not as bad as you like to believe it is.
I mean, FFS, the US may have it's problems, but let's face it, it ain't fucking China.But you're right, that can't be it.
Clearly you're the enlightened one, therefore it *must* be TV...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30899938</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264437780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you initiate a DDoS from China is it's censored in China?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you initiate a DDoS from China is it 's censored in China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you initiate a DDoS from China is it's censored in China?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893810</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264449060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country, it would be insane.</p></div><p>It'd most likely look like an awful lot of unarmed people getting run over by tanks.  Which their government would deny violently by running over, with tanks, any unarmed bloggers who reported it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country , it would be insane.It 'd most likely look like an awful lot of unarmed people getting run over by tanks .
Which their government would deny violently by running over , with tanks , any unarmed bloggers who reported it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays...there are so many people living in that country, it would be insane.It'd most likely look like an awful lot of unarmed people getting run over by tanks.
Which their government would deny violently by running over, with tanks, any unarmed bloggers who reported it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898812</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>MidnightBrewer</author>
	<datestamp>1264427880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are so many people living in that country now it would never happen because they don't share a common cultural or social status.  Also, the great majority of Chinese either don't feel *too* persecuted, or don't feel like they can do anything about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are so many people living in that country now it would never happen because they do n't share a common cultural or social status .
Also , the great majority of Chinese either do n't feel * too * persecuted , or do n't feel like they can do anything about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are so many people living in that country now it would never happen because they don't share a common cultural or social status.
Also, the great majority of Chinese either don't feel *too* persecuted, or don't feel like they can do anything about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894388</id>
	<title>Sacrifice</title>
	<author>Exception Duck</author>
	<datestamp>1264451760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be interesting to see how many of the free speech advocates on slashdot would actually risk their own freedom for freedom of speech.</p><p>It's very easy to sit in your lazyboy and curse other countries when the worst thing that can happen is extension of the mickey mouse law...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be interesting to see how many of the free speech advocates on slashdot would actually risk their own freedom for freedom of speech.It 's very easy to sit in your lazyboy and curse other countries when the worst thing that can happen is extension of the mickey mouse law.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be interesting to see how many of the free speech advocates on slashdot would actually risk their own freedom for freedom of speech.It's very easy to sit in your lazyboy and curse other countries when the worst thing that can happen is extension of the mickey mouse law...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898212</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>anaesthetica</author>
	<datestamp>1264424760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...I know that the Reagan/Thatcher concept is popular, but increased trade...</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Funny, I don't recall any major trade agreements signed by the Reagan administration.  I do remember the Clinton administration pushing NAFTA through <em>and</em> extending Most Favored Nation status to China.

</p><p>In any case, free trade is not a "Reagan/Thatcher concept."  It's a concept put forward most famously by Adam Smith, and then theorized by David Ricardo (who subsequently pushed for the repeal of Britain's Corn Laws in the mid-1840s).  Their idea was that authoritarianism at home would be weakened by the reduction of government control over trade, and free trade would make British gains from trade greater.

</p><p>As far as I know, Reagan and Thatcher (and in all fairness, Deng Xiaoping ought to be thrown in for the trifecta) were rhetorically for free trade, but did not make major pushes for free trade in practice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I know that the Reagan/Thatcher concept is popular , but increased trade... Funny , I do n't recall any major trade agreements signed by the Reagan administration .
I do remember the Clinton administration pushing NAFTA through and extending Most Favored Nation status to China .
In any case , free trade is not a " Reagan/Thatcher concept .
" It 's a concept put forward most famously by Adam Smith , and then theorized by David Ricardo ( who subsequently pushed for the repeal of Britain 's Corn Laws in the mid-1840s ) .
Their idea was that authoritarianism at home would be weakened by the reduction of government control over trade , and free trade would make British gains from trade greater .
As far as I know , Reagan and Thatcher ( and in all fairness , Deng Xiaoping ought to be thrown in for the trifecta ) were rhetorically for free trade , but did not make major pushes for free trade in practice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...I know that the Reagan/Thatcher concept is popular, but increased trade... Funny, I don't recall any major trade agreements signed by the Reagan administration.
I do remember the Clinton administration pushing NAFTA through and extending Most Favored Nation status to China.
In any case, free trade is not a "Reagan/Thatcher concept.
"  It's a concept put forward most famously by Adam Smith, and then theorized by David Ricardo (who subsequently pushed for the repeal of Britain's Corn Laws in the mid-1840s).
Their idea was that authoritarianism at home would be weakened by the reduction of government control over trade, and free trade would make British gains from trade greater.
As far as I know, Reagan and Thatcher (and in all fairness, Deng Xiaoping ought to be thrown in for the trifecta) were rhetorically for free trade, but did not make major pushes for free trade in practice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30902164</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1264507560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadays</p></div><p>Not to mention the US; in fact, it is much likely that we will see uprisings in the US. The difference being that the Chinese have for a long time experienced sustained improvements in their lives, whereas the Americans have seen thing get worse. Why should Chinese revolt against a government they can reasonably argue has improved their situation dramatically?</p><p>On the other hand, I have over the last several decades (yes, I'm that old) seen Americans complaining louder and louder, and the political situation now looks extreme to outside observers. It is, sadly, not unthinkable that there will be significant, social unrest in the US.</p><p>All this talk about "freedom" and "democracy" is only talk, by and large, and their meaning depend on the culture in which you live - they are not universal truths.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadaysNot to mention the US ; in fact , it is much likely that we will see uprisings in the US .
The difference being that the Chinese have for a long time experienced sustained improvements in their lives , whereas the Americans have seen thing get worse .
Why should Chinese revolt against a government they can reasonably argue has improved their situation dramatically ? On the other hand , I have over the last several decades ( yes , I 'm that old ) seen Americans complaining louder and louder , and the political situation now looks extreme to outside observers .
It is , sadly , not unthinkable that there will be significant , social unrest in the US.All this talk about " freedom " and " democracy " is only talk , by and large , and their meaning depend on the culture in which you live - they are not universal truths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what a full-blown revolt in China would look like nowadaysNot to mention the US; in fact, it is much likely that we will see uprisings in the US.
The difference being that the Chinese have for a long time experienced sustained improvements in their lives, whereas the Americans have seen thing get worse.
Why should Chinese revolt against a government they can reasonably argue has improved their situation dramatically?On the other hand, I have over the last several decades (yes, I'm that old) seen Americans complaining louder and louder, and the political situation now looks extreme to outside observers.
It is, sadly, not unthinkable that there will be significant, social unrest in the US.All this talk about "freedom" and "democracy" is only talk, by and large, and their meaning depend on the culture in which you live - they are not universal truths.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894752</id>
	<title>Sourceforge blocking foreign access IAW US law</title>
	<author>mmell</author>
	<datestamp>1264410060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/25/1854241/SourceForge-Clarifies-Denial-of-Site-Access" title="slashdot.org">http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/25/1854241/SourceForge-Clarifies-Denial-of-Site-Access</a> [slashdot.org] <p>
Anybody but me see a possible correlation here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/25/1854241/SourceForge-Clarifies-Denial-of-Site-Access [ slashdot.org ] Anybody but me see a possible correlation here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/25/1854241/SourceForge-Clarifies-Denial-of-Site-Access [slashdot.org] 
Anybody but me see a possible correlation here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893282</id>
	<title>Keeping Score</title>
	<author>palmerj3</author>
	<datestamp>1264446780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google: 1

China: 1</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google : 1 China : 1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google: 1

China: 1</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893782</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1264448880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would they revolt?<br>The have it better now than anytime in their history. Sure a few may come to the US and the EU but they will see the improvements that they have been making over time and expect them to continue.</p><p>Not to mention that they are proud that went from being a third world nation to a super power in a generation.<br>I don't like the way things work in China but if you look back to how they worked before I think you will see that a DOS and great firewall are progress compared to the cultural revolution.</p></div><p>It's seemingly good for them -- for now. But there are a lot of parallels to America's own past. We had our Gilded Age and we had our bust after that, we had our Roaring 20's and our Great Depression. During the boom times, everyone thought that they could get their piece of the action, have a nice, thick slice of the pie. But when everything crashed, the average worker found out that they weren't left holding anything but the bag. This is why we could go from the rah-rah capitalism of the 20's to robber-barons seriously worrying about a communist revolution in the 30's. That's the only reason why FDR was able to pass the reforms he did, because the people with the money realized they had to throw the workers some kind of bone or risk everything going red.</p><p>So things are going great for China -- for now. But just how firm is the foundation they're building this economic empire on? We're already seeing the cracks in Dubai. The crappy infrastructure is a concrete and steel metaphor for the place, a gilded turd. It's a giant speculative bubble built on something even less substantial than sand. It's no wonder everything is crashing down once the hype ends.</p><p>During that big quake of theirs we caught a glimpse of China's way of doing business. The older buildings stood up because they were built boring and according to standards put in place during the "we're really trying to be communist" era. The newer buildings were built during the "we're only nominally communist, don't tell anyone" era and lots of shortcuts and substitutions were made in materials and workmanship, just like in the gangster capitalism countries. The newer buildings collapsed, the older ones not so much.</p><p>If China's prosperity proves as ephemeral as the typical bubble economy, things could get ugly rather quickly. Lots of Chinese are still taking it in the shorts. If there's not even the fiction of possibly becoming wealthy, they're not going to suffer quietly. There's the demographic crisis with lots of young men and not as many young women for them to marry. There's ethnic unrest amongst the non-Han population. There's looming ecological disasters, famine, drought, flooding, etc. And my personal guess -- if I were writing a techno-thriller this is how I'd do it -- is that things are going to really turn to shit when the Three Gorges Dam finally gets a 7.0 or greater quake and suffers a catastrophic failure. The death of a prestige project, the loss of all that hydroelectric power, plus all the deaths from the flooding downstream. Could be taken as a sign that the rulers just lost the mandate of heaven, or it could be taken to show that the rulers can't get anything right.</p><p>This is not to say a rebellion WILL happen, just that it's certainly conceivable and doesn't require many leaps and contortions of logic to hypothesize.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would they revolt ? The have it better now than anytime in their history .
Sure a few may come to the US and the EU but they will see the improvements that they have been making over time and expect them to continue.Not to mention that they are proud that went from being a third world nation to a super power in a generation.I do n't like the way things work in China but if you look back to how they worked before I think you will see that a DOS and great firewall are progress compared to the cultural revolution.It 's seemingly good for them -- for now .
But there are a lot of parallels to America 's own past .
We had our Gilded Age and we had our bust after that , we had our Roaring 20 's and our Great Depression .
During the boom times , everyone thought that they could get their piece of the action , have a nice , thick slice of the pie .
But when everything crashed , the average worker found out that they were n't left holding anything but the bag .
This is why we could go from the rah-rah capitalism of the 20 's to robber-barons seriously worrying about a communist revolution in the 30 's .
That 's the only reason why FDR was able to pass the reforms he did , because the people with the money realized they had to throw the workers some kind of bone or risk everything going red.So things are going great for China -- for now .
But just how firm is the foundation they 're building this economic empire on ?
We 're already seeing the cracks in Dubai .
The crappy infrastructure is a concrete and steel metaphor for the place , a gilded turd .
It 's a giant speculative bubble built on something even less substantial than sand .
It 's no wonder everything is crashing down once the hype ends.During that big quake of theirs we caught a glimpse of China 's way of doing business .
The older buildings stood up because they were built boring and according to standards put in place during the " we 're really trying to be communist " era .
The newer buildings were built during the " we 're only nominally communist , do n't tell anyone " era and lots of shortcuts and substitutions were made in materials and workmanship , just like in the gangster capitalism countries .
The newer buildings collapsed , the older ones not so much.If China 's prosperity proves as ephemeral as the typical bubble economy , things could get ugly rather quickly .
Lots of Chinese are still taking it in the shorts .
If there 's not even the fiction of possibly becoming wealthy , they 're not going to suffer quietly .
There 's the demographic crisis with lots of young men and not as many young women for them to marry .
There 's ethnic unrest amongst the non-Han population .
There 's looming ecological disasters , famine , drought , flooding , etc .
And my personal guess -- if I were writing a techno-thriller this is how I 'd do it -- is that things are going to really turn to shit when the Three Gorges Dam finally gets a 7.0 or greater quake and suffers a catastrophic failure .
The death of a prestige project , the loss of all that hydroelectric power , plus all the deaths from the flooding downstream .
Could be taken as a sign that the rulers just lost the mandate of heaven , or it could be taken to show that the rulers ca n't get anything right.This is not to say a rebellion WILL happen , just that it 's certainly conceivable and does n't require many leaps and contortions of logic to hypothesize .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would they revolt?The have it better now than anytime in their history.
Sure a few may come to the US and the EU but they will see the improvements that they have been making over time and expect them to continue.Not to mention that they are proud that went from being a third world nation to a super power in a generation.I don't like the way things work in China but if you look back to how they worked before I think you will see that a DOS and great firewall are progress compared to the cultural revolution.It's seemingly good for them -- for now.
But there are a lot of parallels to America's own past.
We had our Gilded Age and we had our bust after that, we had our Roaring 20's and our Great Depression.
During the boom times, everyone thought that they could get their piece of the action, have a nice, thick slice of the pie.
But when everything crashed, the average worker found out that they weren't left holding anything but the bag.
This is why we could go from the rah-rah capitalism of the 20's to robber-barons seriously worrying about a communist revolution in the 30's.
That's the only reason why FDR was able to pass the reforms he did, because the people with the money realized they had to throw the workers some kind of bone or risk everything going red.So things are going great for China -- for now.
But just how firm is the foundation they're building this economic empire on?
We're already seeing the cracks in Dubai.
The crappy infrastructure is a concrete and steel metaphor for the place, a gilded turd.
It's a giant speculative bubble built on something even less substantial than sand.
It's no wonder everything is crashing down once the hype ends.During that big quake of theirs we caught a glimpse of China's way of doing business.
The older buildings stood up because they were built boring and according to standards put in place during the "we're really trying to be communist" era.
The newer buildings were built during the "we're only nominally communist, don't tell anyone" era and lots of shortcuts and substitutions were made in materials and workmanship, just like in the gangster capitalism countries.
The newer buildings collapsed, the older ones not so much.If China's prosperity proves as ephemeral as the typical bubble economy, things could get ugly rather quickly.
Lots of Chinese are still taking it in the shorts.
If there's not even the fiction of possibly becoming wealthy, they're not going to suffer quietly.
There's the demographic crisis with lots of young men and not as many young women for them to marry.
There's ethnic unrest amongst the non-Han population.
There's looming ecological disasters, famine, drought, flooding, etc.
And my personal guess -- if I were writing a techno-thriller this is how I'd do it -- is that things are going to really turn to shit when the Three Gorges Dam finally gets a 7.0 or greater quake and suffers a catastrophic failure.
The death of a prestige project, the loss of all that hydroelectric power, plus all the deaths from the flooding downstream.
Could be taken as a sign that the rulers just lost the mandate of heaven, or it could be taken to show that the rulers can't get anything right.This is not to say a rebellion WILL happen, just that it's certainly conceivable and doesn't require many leaps and contortions of logic to hypothesize.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897988</id>
	<title>Re:Looking for a fight in all the wrong places.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264423800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How stupid can a government be?!!</p></div><p>All in all, pretty darned stupid, really.</p><p>Power has a way of making advisers tell you what you want to hear, which can lead to some really silly decisions.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How stupid can a government be ? !
! All in all , pretty darned stupid , really.Power has a way of making advisers tell you what you want to hear , which can lead to some really silly decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How stupid can a government be?!
!All in all, pretty darned stupid, really.Power has a way of making advisers tell you what you want to hear, which can lead to some really silly decisions.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893380</id>
	<title>OT question</title>
	<author>JonStewartMill</author>
	<datestamp>1264447200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; All spelling and grammar errors are intentional. Grammar Nazis' need entertainment.<br> <br>

Including the one in your sig?</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; All spelling and grammar errors are intentional .
Grammar Nazis ' need entertainment .
Including the one in your sig ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; All spelling and grammar errors are intentional.
Grammar Nazis' need entertainment.
Including the one in your sig?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30899058</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1264429800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts don't happen.It works great in developed countries.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts do n't happen.It works great in developed countries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts don't happen.It works great in developed countries.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894302</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1264451340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would make sense, except in other countries (that had TVs) there have been revolutions when the population hit a certain level of wealth.  South Korea and Taiwan come to mind.....Taiwan was a single-party dictatorship until the 80s.  The revolution was relatively peaceful, but I don't think anyone minds.  It seems as soon as people have certain basic needs met and reach a certain level of comfort, they begin to start looking for more freedom.  It seems reasonable to believe this will happen in China too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would make sense , except in other countries ( that had TVs ) there have been revolutions when the population hit a certain level of wealth .
South Korea and Taiwan come to mind.....Taiwan was a single-party dictatorship until the 80s .
The revolution was relatively peaceful , but I do n't think anyone minds .
It seems as soon as people have certain basic needs met and reach a certain level of comfort , they begin to start looking for more freedom .
It seems reasonable to believe this will happen in China too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would make sense, except in other countries (that had TVs) there have been revolutions when the population hit a certain level of wealth.
South Korea and Taiwan come to mind.....Taiwan was a single-party dictatorship until the 80s.
The revolution was relatively peaceful, but I don't think anyone minds.
It seems as soon as people have certain basic needs met and reach a certain level of comfort, they begin to start looking for more freedom.
It seems reasonable to believe this will happen in China too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896106</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264415400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Basic human rights? What part of the US do you live in? San Quentin?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Basic human rights ?
What part of the US do you live in ?
San Quentin ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Basic human rights?
What part of the US do you live in?
San Quentin?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892418</id>
	<title>Chinese Gov't     Public Relations</title>
	<author>Orleron</author>
	<datestamp>1264443180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>After hacking Google and 34 other companies, you would think the Chinese government would lie low for a little while to let things simmer down.... not THIS.  <br>
Sheesh... a freshman in a public relations degree program would know that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After hacking Google and 34 other companies , you would think the Chinese government would lie low for a little while to let things simmer down.... not THIS .
Sheesh... a freshman in a public relations degree program would know that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After hacking Google and 34 other companies, you would think the Chinese government would lie low for a little while to let things simmer down.... not THIS.
Sheesh... a freshman in a public relations degree program would know that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368</id>
	<title>One day</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1264443000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We'll look back on this kind of persecution and vow never to let it happen again. I won't be the first one to break Godwin's Law but you know exactly where I'm headed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 'll look back on this kind of persecution and vow never to let it happen again .
I wo n't be the first one to break Godwin 's Law but you know exactly where I 'm headed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We'll look back on this kind of persecution and vow never to let it happen again.
I won't be the first one to break Godwin's Law but you know exactly where I'm headed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897002</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Lord Ender</author>
	<datestamp>1264418700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts don't happen.</p><p>It works great in developed countries.</p></div></blockquote><p>You have it backward: TV sets make people <b>unhappy</b>. Advertising works by convincing you that you have a problem or are in some way inadequate, then offering you a solution in the form of a product. It's primary goal is to make you miserable. News works by terrifying you about something (anything) and convincing you that continuing to watch the program is of some mortal benefit to you.</p><p>I stopped watching TV and try to avoid the news (within reason). I am 100x happier.</p><p>By any objective measure, the citizens of developed nations today are better-off than even the upper-crust of all the rest of humanity's civilizations. We don't die of cholera; we don't fear warlords and knights; we don't starve; we are not forced to worship someone else's gods. We have it great. The primary reason we don't realize this, in my opinion, is the evil of news and advertising I mentioned above.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts do n't happen.It works great in developed countries.You have it backward : TV sets make people unhappy .
Advertising works by convincing you that you have a problem or are in some way inadequate , then offering you a solution in the form of a product .
It 's primary goal is to make you miserable .
News works by terrifying you about something ( anything ) and convincing you that continuing to watch the program is of some mortal benefit to you.I stopped watching TV and try to avoid the news ( within reason ) .
I am 100x happier.By any objective measure , the citizens of developed nations today are better-off than even the upper-crust of all the rest of humanity 's civilizations .
We do n't die of cholera ; we do n't fear warlords and knights ; we do n't starve ; we are not forced to worship someone else 's gods .
We have it great .
The primary reason we do n't realize this , in my opinion , is the evil of news and advertising I mentioned above .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they give them all TV sets that should be enough to pacify enough of them so that revolts don't happen.It works great in developed countries.You have it backward: TV sets make people unhappy.
Advertising works by convincing you that you have a problem or are in some way inadequate, then offering you a solution in the form of a product.
It's primary goal is to make you miserable.
News works by terrifying you about something (anything) and convincing you that continuing to watch the program is of some mortal benefit to you.I stopped watching TV and try to avoid the news (within reason).
I am 100x happier.By any objective measure, the citizens of developed nations today are better-off than even the upper-crust of all the rest of humanity's civilizations.
We don't die of cholera; we don't fear warlords and knights; we don't starve; we are not forced to worship someone else's gods.
We have it great.
The primary reason we don't realize this, in my opinion, is the evil of news and advertising I mentioned above.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893096</id>
	<title>What about a reverse firewall</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264446000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not build a reverse firewall?</p><p>They have the GFW, we put the reverse GFW.</p><p>All suspicious traffic will be filtered.</p><p>All CCP official web sites like China Daily, CCTV, Xinhua, etc will be blocked.</p><p>Maybe block also all chinese  internet sevice like Baidu, Youkuo etc as long as equivalent services out or China are blocked in their GFW</p><p>And periodic massive DOS attacks to the servers managing their censorship</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not build a reverse firewall ? They have the GFW , we put the reverse GFW.All suspicious traffic will be filtered.All CCP official web sites like China Daily , CCTV , Xinhua , etc will be blocked.Maybe block also all chinese internet sevice like Baidu , Youkuo etc as long as equivalent services out or China are blocked in their GFWAnd periodic massive DOS attacks to the servers managing their censorship</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not build a reverse firewall?They have the GFW, we put the reverse GFW.All suspicious traffic will be filtered.All CCP official web sites like China Daily, CCTV, Xinhua, etc will be blocked.Maybe block also all chinese  internet sevice like Baidu, Youkuo etc as long as equivalent services out or China are blocked in their GFWAnd periodic massive DOS attacks to the servers managing their censorship</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892914</id>
	<title>The USA is headed in the same direction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264445100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As our government continues to remove our liberties and giving it all to itself, its only a matter of time before the New World Order strips us of our constitution and begins imposing the same treatment on us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As our government continues to remove our liberties and giving it all to itself , its only a matter of time before the New World Order strips us of our constitution and begins imposing the same treatment on us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As our government continues to remove our liberties and giving it all to itself, its only a matter of time before the New World Order strips us of our constitution and begins imposing the same treatment on us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896034</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264415160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Extending your thoughts a bit: there are over 1.3 billion people in China. Most of them were poor farmers before and are still poor farmers now. Somewhere between 100-400 million are getting to experience the boom times now; but even among those, it's important to realize that only a very small fraction are riding the top of the wave. The rest are the ones who instead went from being poor farmers to being poor factory workers doing 12+ hour days and slowly dying from the crap in the air. The military and police are drawn from all walks of life, proportionally.</p><p>If a few thousand peasants or a few thousand workers revolt, it gets put down. If a few hundred million peasants or a few hundred million workers revolt, it's outright civil war. Today's elite wouldn't be able to stop it, just like past elites couldn't; they are far too few in number relative to the rest, and in any serious revolution (in any country, not just China), a huge slice of the military itself changes sides. 50 million rich with 1 million soldiers don't beat 400 million with 8 million equally armed soldiers (I assume that, as in most revolutions, the rest will be trying to keep their heads down and just hope to survive it all). And remember an oft-overlooked bit of imagery from Tienanmen: yes, a man stood in front of a tank... and the tank driver refused to run him over.</p><p>Due to China's current setup, a recession would cause their entire system to pancake. They're a net food importer and the poor farmers rely on family members in the factories to make ends meet. Fire a bunch of workers and they're going to go where and do what? And their families are going to survive how? It would get very messy, very quickly, and everywhere at once.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Extending your thoughts a bit : there are over 1.3 billion people in China .
Most of them were poor farmers before and are still poor farmers now .
Somewhere between 100-400 million are getting to experience the boom times now ; but even among those , it 's important to realize that only a very small fraction are riding the top of the wave .
The rest are the ones who instead went from being poor farmers to being poor factory workers doing 12 + hour days and slowly dying from the crap in the air .
The military and police are drawn from all walks of life , proportionally.If a few thousand peasants or a few thousand workers revolt , it gets put down .
If a few hundred million peasants or a few hundred million workers revolt , it 's outright civil war .
Today 's elite would n't be able to stop it , just like past elites could n't ; they are far too few in number relative to the rest , and in any serious revolution ( in any country , not just China ) , a huge slice of the military itself changes sides .
50 million rich with 1 million soldiers do n't beat 400 million with 8 million equally armed soldiers ( I assume that , as in most revolutions , the rest will be trying to keep their heads down and just hope to survive it all ) .
And remember an oft-overlooked bit of imagery from Tienanmen : yes , a man stood in front of a tank... and the tank driver refused to run him over.Due to China 's current setup , a recession would cause their entire system to pancake .
They 're a net food importer and the poor farmers rely on family members in the factories to make ends meet .
Fire a bunch of workers and they 're going to go where and do what ?
And their families are going to survive how ?
It would get very messy , very quickly , and everywhere at once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Extending your thoughts a bit: there are over 1.3 billion people in China.
Most of them were poor farmers before and are still poor farmers now.
Somewhere between 100-400 million are getting to experience the boom times now; but even among those, it's important to realize that only a very small fraction are riding the top of the wave.
The rest are the ones who instead went from being poor farmers to being poor factory workers doing 12+ hour days and slowly dying from the crap in the air.
The military and police are drawn from all walks of life, proportionally.If a few thousand peasants or a few thousand workers revolt, it gets put down.
If a few hundred million peasants or a few hundred million workers revolt, it's outright civil war.
Today's elite wouldn't be able to stop it, just like past elites couldn't; they are far too few in number relative to the rest, and in any serious revolution (in any country, not just China), a huge slice of the military itself changes sides.
50 million rich with 1 million soldiers don't beat 400 million with 8 million equally armed soldiers (I assume that, as in most revolutions, the rest will be trying to keep their heads down and just hope to survive it all).
And remember an oft-overlooked bit of imagery from Tienanmen: yes, a man stood in front of a tank... and the tank driver refused to run him over.Due to China's current setup, a recession would cause their entire system to pancake.
They're a net food importer and the poor farmers rely on family members in the factories to make ends meet.
Fire a bunch of workers and they're going to go where and do what?
And their families are going to survive how?
It would get very messy, very quickly, and everywhere at once.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893840</id>
	<title>at some point, your economy stops growing</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1264449240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>maybe even sinks a little. then all hell breaks lose</p><p>sure, everything is quiet now, and plenty support the grumpy old technocrats in beijing. because they are delivering massive economic growth. but the elite are living on borrowed time, because when things go south, and they will: no country grows economically unhindered forever, then the people will ask questions. and then the grumpy old men in beijing won't have answers, just platitudes and lies, and so the people will look to other grumpy old men to answer those questions. but since there is no peaceful way to make regime change, a la a democracy, then the government becomes increasingly seen as illegitimate by its people, and before long, beijing looks like tehran</p><p>democracy is the only form of government that manufactures legitimacy, appeasing the masses. the people vote, there's a new face, a new ideology, and everyone is happy again. but of course, discord grows again, it always does. so you repeat in a few years. this is the most powerful positive attribute of democracy: legitimacy. which leads to social stability, security, economic growth, a good environment for education: everything you hold dear. manufacturing legitimacy offsets all of democracy's messiness</p><p>in fact, the autocrats frequently talk about "harmony" being a positive value and ooh: look at how messy and full of discord democracies are. and the autocrats are absolutely right, democracies ARE messy. except that the harmony they provide is a placid lie, a pressure cooker. messiness and discord is the natural state of human politics: an ugly truth. "harmony" is the false state of mankind. we bicker, and we always will. "harmony" is borrowed time, only the calm before the storm. but apparently the grumpy old men can't see that. autocracies, no matter how orderly, inevitably decay in legitimacy over time in the eyes of the people they govern, because there's no institutionalized means of feedback like a democracy provides. so a breaking point is reached, and all hell breaks out. and then you have iran</p><p>its completely unavoidable, unless the grumpy old men in beijing prove to be the REAL geniuses they supposedly are, and transition to democracy. it's not like they haven't done every other point in the master plan:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three\_Principles\_of\_the\_People" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three\_Principles\_of\_the\_People</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>they have 1. the nationalism. they kicked out all the foreign parasites. they righted the shame of the british forcing opium on them. they got out from under the warlords. they united, strong and vigilant<br>they have 2. 'the People's welfare/livelihood'. deng xiaoping said "let a thousand flowers bloom", and they did: economic might definitely came.<br>now all they have left is 3. democracy. so pull the trigger already, you fuckers. it's all right there in the fucking master plan</p><p>did you forget, grumpy old men?</p><p>if the technocracts choose democracy, we are entering an age of world dominance by china, because it will be economically powerful AND stable, and i really wouldn't be bothered by it either, i'd welcome it. a change of pace from american ideological inconsistency and lack of coherence and damaged integrity on the world stage</p><p>but if the technocrats choose the tiananmen square answer to calls for democracy, china is not going to be a world power, not for a thousand years. its going to sink into discord and mediocrity and simmering anger. and i will then only say to china: serves you right. because you either give a voice to your people, or you're illegitimate. in your people's eyes, and the eyes of the world</p><p>the grumpy old men are living on borrowed time. but i haven't completely written them off. remember, we're talking about a communist party which has embraced rabid capitalism. if they can pull off that ideological dissonance, i don't see why they can't pull off the ideological dissonance of an autocracy choosing democracy</p><p>its your move, grumpy old men. choose wisely. for the sake of a billion and a half people, please, choose wisely</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe even sinks a little .
then all hell breaks losesure , everything is quiet now , and plenty support the grumpy old technocrats in beijing .
because they are delivering massive economic growth .
but the elite are living on borrowed time , because when things go south , and they will : no country grows economically unhindered forever , then the people will ask questions .
and then the grumpy old men in beijing wo n't have answers , just platitudes and lies , and so the people will look to other grumpy old men to answer those questions .
but since there is no peaceful way to make regime change , a la a democracy , then the government becomes increasingly seen as illegitimate by its people , and before long , beijing looks like tehrandemocracy is the only form of government that manufactures legitimacy , appeasing the masses .
the people vote , there 's a new face , a new ideology , and everyone is happy again .
but of course , discord grows again , it always does .
so you repeat in a few years .
this is the most powerful positive attribute of democracy : legitimacy .
which leads to social stability , security , economic growth , a good environment for education : everything you hold dear .
manufacturing legitimacy offsets all of democracy 's messinessin fact , the autocrats frequently talk about " harmony " being a positive value and ooh : look at how messy and full of discord democracies are .
and the autocrats are absolutely right , democracies ARE messy .
except that the harmony they provide is a placid lie , a pressure cooker .
messiness and discord is the natural state of human politics : an ugly truth .
" harmony " is the false state of mankind .
we bicker , and we always will .
" harmony " is borrowed time , only the calm before the storm .
but apparently the grumpy old men ca n't see that .
autocracies , no matter how orderly , inevitably decay in legitimacy over time in the eyes of the people they govern , because there 's no institutionalized means of feedback like a democracy provides .
so a breaking point is reached , and all hell breaks out .
and then you have iranits completely unavoidable , unless the grumpy old men in beijing prove to be the REAL geniuses they supposedly are , and transition to democracy .
it 's not like they have n't done every other point in the master plan : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three \ _Principles \ _of \ _the \ _People [ wikipedia.org ] they have 1. the nationalism .
they kicked out all the foreign parasites .
they righted the shame of the british forcing opium on them .
they got out from under the warlords .
they united , strong and vigilantthey have 2 .
'the People 's welfare/livelihood' .
deng xiaoping said " let a thousand flowers bloom " , and they did : economic might definitely came.now all they have left is 3. democracy. so pull the trigger already , you fuckers .
it 's all right there in the fucking master plandid you forget , grumpy old men ? if the technocracts choose democracy , we are entering an age of world dominance by china , because it will be economically powerful AND stable , and i really would n't be bothered by it either , i 'd welcome it .
a change of pace from american ideological inconsistency and lack of coherence and damaged integrity on the world stagebut if the technocrats choose the tiananmen square answer to calls for democracy , china is not going to be a world power , not for a thousand years .
its going to sink into discord and mediocrity and simmering anger .
and i will then only say to china : serves you right .
because you either give a voice to your people , or you 're illegitimate .
in your people 's eyes , and the eyes of the worldthe grumpy old men are living on borrowed time .
but i have n't completely written them off .
remember , we 're talking about a communist party which has embraced rabid capitalism .
if they can pull off that ideological dissonance , i do n't see why they ca n't pull off the ideological dissonance of an autocracy choosing democracyits your move , grumpy old men .
choose wisely .
for the sake of a billion and a half people , please , choose wisely</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe even sinks a little.
then all hell breaks losesure, everything is quiet now, and plenty support the grumpy old technocrats in beijing.
because they are delivering massive economic growth.
but the elite are living on borrowed time, because when things go south, and they will: no country grows economically unhindered forever, then the people will ask questions.
and then the grumpy old men in beijing won't have answers, just platitudes and lies, and so the people will look to other grumpy old men to answer those questions.
but since there is no peaceful way to make regime change, a la a democracy, then the government becomes increasingly seen as illegitimate by its people, and before long, beijing looks like tehrandemocracy is the only form of government that manufactures legitimacy, appeasing the masses.
the people vote, there's a new face, a new ideology, and everyone is happy again.
but of course, discord grows again, it always does.
so you repeat in a few years.
this is the most powerful positive attribute of democracy: legitimacy.
which leads to social stability, security, economic growth, a good environment for education: everything you hold dear.
manufacturing legitimacy offsets all of democracy's messinessin fact, the autocrats frequently talk about "harmony" being a positive value and ooh: look at how messy and full of discord democracies are.
and the autocrats are absolutely right, democracies ARE messy.
except that the harmony they provide is a placid lie, a pressure cooker.
messiness and discord is the natural state of human politics: an ugly truth.
"harmony" is the false state of mankind.
we bicker, and we always will.
"harmony" is borrowed time, only the calm before the storm.
but apparently the grumpy old men can't see that.
autocracies, no matter how orderly, inevitably decay in legitimacy over time in the eyes of the people they govern, because there's no institutionalized means of feedback like a democracy provides.
so a breaking point is reached, and all hell breaks out.
and then you have iranits completely unavoidable, unless the grumpy old men in beijing prove to be the REAL geniuses they supposedly are, and transition to democracy.
it's not like they haven't done every other point in the master plan:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three\_Principles\_of\_the\_People [wikipedia.org]they have 1. the nationalism.
they kicked out all the foreign parasites.
they righted the shame of the british forcing opium on them.
they got out from under the warlords.
they united, strong and vigilantthey have 2.
'the People's welfare/livelihood'.
deng xiaoping said "let a thousand flowers bloom", and they did: economic might definitely came.now all they have left is 3. democracy. so pull the trigger already, you fuckers.
it's all right there in the fucking master plandid you forget, grumpy old men?if the technocracts choose democracy, we are entering an age of world dominance by china, because it will be economically powerful AND stable, and i really wouldn't be bothered by it either, i'd welcome it.
a change of pace from american ideological inconsistency and lack of coherence and damaged integrity on the world stagebut if the technocrats choose the tiananmen square answer to calls for democracy, china is not going to be a world power, not for a thousand years.
its going to sink into discord and mediocrity and simmering anger.
and i will then only say to china: serves you right.
because you either give a voice to your people, or you're illegitimate.
in your people's eyes, and the eyes of the worldthe grumpy old men are living on borrowed time.
but i haven't completely written them off.
remember, we're talking about a communist party which has embraced rabid capitalism.
if they can pull off that ideological dissonance, i don't see why they can't pull off the ideological dissonance of an autocracy choosing democracyits your move, grumpy old men.
choose wisely.
for the sake of a billion and a half people, please, choose wisely</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892844</id>
	<title>Re:Looking for a fight in all the wrong places.</title>
	<author>Ziekheid</author>
	<datestamp>1264444740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's really hilarious that people assume the government had anything to do with this.<br>Do you really think they would be this stupid and obvious about these things?<br>It's just some random scriptkid with a botnet trying to get some media attention; "lol, I did that heheheh".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's really hilarious that people assume the government had anything to do with this.Do you really think they would be this stupid and obvious about these things ? It 's just some random scriptkid with a botnet trying to get some media attention ; " lol , I did that heheheh " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's really hilarious that people assume the government had anything to do with this.Do you really think they would be this stupid and obvious about these things?It's just some random scriptkid with a botnet trying to get some media attention; "lol, I did that heheheh".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896622</id>
	<title>Re:Getting rid of pesky pests</title>
	<author>LeperPuppet</author>
	<datestamp>1264417140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hey, if it worked with Google, why not try that with human rights organizations?</p></div><p>The only problem with China's hacking attacks against Google was that Google didn't shut up and suffer quietly like most of their victims usually do. While Google's responses allow it to be completely blocked by the government, they still constitute a large black eye on the world stage.  The more focus on China's ongoing political cyberwar against foreign entities, the better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , if it worked with Google , why not try that with human rights organizations ? The only problem with China 's hacking attacks against Google was that Google did n't shut up and suffer quietly like most of their victims usually do .
While Google 's responses allow it to be completely blocked by the government , they still constitute a large black eye on the world stage .
The more focus on China 's ongoing political cyberwar against foreign entities , the better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, if it worked with Google, why not try that with human rights organizations?The only problem with China's hacking attacks against Google was that Google didn't shut up and suffer quietly like most of their victims usually do.
While Google's responses allow it to be completely blocked by the government, they still constitute a large black eye on the world stage.
The more focus on China's ongoing political cyberwar against foreign entities, the better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893280</id>
	<title>Not true</title>
	<author>microbox</author>
	<datestamp>1264446780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The have it better now than anytime in their history. </i> <br>
<br>
There are now two Chinas. The vast majority are working poor, and are severely and even cruelly suppressed. <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/view/" title="pbs.org">PBS has a good documentary about 1989</a> [pbs.org], which includes an extensive section on what working in China is like now, and how the country has been changing.<br> <br>
If you watch this documentary, you might easily see why a large number of chinese people might want to revolt, if they weren't so completely powerless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The have it better now than anytime in their history .
There are now two Chinas .
The vast majority are working poor , and are severely and even cruelly suppressed .
PBS has a good documentary about 1989 [ pbs.org ] , which includes an extensive section on what working in China is like now , and how the country has been changing .
If you watch this documentary , you might easily see why a large number of chinese people might want to revolt , if they were n't so completely powerless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The have it better now than anytime in their history.
There are now two Chinas.
The vast majority are working poor, and are severely and even cruelly suppressed.
PBS has a good documentary about 1989 [pbs.org], which includes an extensive section on what working in China is like now, and how the country has been changing.
If you watch this documentary, you might easily see why a large number of chinese people might want to revolt, if they weren't so completely powerless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893644</id>
	<title>Re:But... but hacking is ILLEGAL in China!</title>
	<author>tangelogee</author>
	<datestamp>1264448100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...what's that, you want Poland(or some other closer country)? sure, you can have Poland, if you promise to stop there...</htmltext>
<tokenext>...what 's that , you want Poland ( or some other closer country ) ?
sure , you can have Poland , if you promise to stop there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...what's that, you want Poland(or some other closer country)?
sure, you can have Poland, if you promise to stop there...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893584</id>
	<title>Divides</title>
	<author>mindbrane</author>
	<datestamp>1264447920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>E.O.Wilson wrote an essay in the late 90's suggesting China is the test case for humanity's attempts to find solutions to environmental and population problems. China as a traditional agrarian male dominated culture has moved from a practise of female infanticide to using technology to abort female foetuses. From this practise a sex ratio imbalance has arisen that some see as of little current or historical importance.  <a href="http://news.discovery.com/human/china-birth-rate-single-men.html" title="discovery.com">The nation's one-child policy could leave 24 million bachelors by the year 2020</a> [discovery.com]. My own readings in history have taken on views more in line from what has been learnt from the last few decades of research in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primatology" title="wikipedia.org">primatology</a> [wikipedia.org]. Chimpanzee behaviour favouring, figuratively speaking, male oligarchies restricting access to resources maps clearly, in my mind, onto all three, still widely practised, Mediterranean death cult religions promulgating male dominated societies. Based on China's current sex ratio imbalance the questions to be addressed probably can be set in historical, anthropological and primatological contexts. </p><p>Personally I suspect China flirted with democracy, but as is nearly always the case, power structures are not given to relinquishing dominion. Recently<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. ran a story that the Chinese government replaced the movie "Avatar" with a biography of <a href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucius/" title="stanford.edu">Confucius</a> [stanford.edu]. The works of Confucius are only known by way of reconstructions, but his core message seems to have been one of a familia philosophy, strongly patriarchal, and, in that light, like the Christian, Islamic and Judaic cults that I find map well onto Chimpanzee behaviour. The core mandate of such power structures is submission and tradition. I suspect the Chinese government, if not the Chinese people, are moving away from democracy and into a tradition bound version of Confucianism, but at best it's only a superficial reading.</p><p>The discussion can go on and deeper but one current salient point should be made. Chinese society is observed to be much more family orientated than our western societies. A recent rampage killing in the international press was reported on as having happened in western societies because the killer was deranged, whereas the Chinese feedback suggested the man went on a killing spree because his family wasn't there to support him. Western society is strongly vested in the rights of the individual, China not nearly so much. If the West and China and, perhaps much of Asia, are to achieve an equilibrium than we're going to have to bridge this core cultural divide from both sides.</p><p>just my loose change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>E.O.Wilson wrote an essay in the late 90 's suggesting China is the test case for humanity 's attempts to find solutions to environmental and population problems .
China as a traditional agrarian male dominated culture has moved from a practise of female infanticide to using technology to abort female foetuses .
From this practise a sex ratio imbalance has arisen that some see as of little current or historical importance .
The nation 's one-child policy could leave 24 million bachelors by the year 2020 [ discovery.com ] .
My own readings in history have taken on views more in line from what has been learnt from the last few decades of research in primatology [ wikipedia.org ] .
Chimpanzee behaviour favouring , figuratively speaking , male oligarchies restricting access to resources maps clearly , in my mind , onto all three , still widely practised , Mediterranean death cult religions promulgating male dominated societies .
Based on China 's current sex ratio imbalance the questions to be addressed probably can be set in historical , anthropological and primatological contexts .
Personally I suspect China flirted with democracy , but as is nearly always the case , power structures are not given to relinquishing dominion .
Recently / .
ran a story that the Chinese government replaced the movie " Avatar " with a biography of Confucius [ stanford.edu ] .
The works of Confucius are only known by way of reconstructions , but his core message seems to have been one of a familia philosophy , strongly patriarchal , and , in that light , like the Christian , Islamic and Judaic cults that I find map well onto Chimpanzee behaviour .
The core mandate of such power structures is submission and tradition .
I suspect the Chinese government , if not the Chinese people , are moving away from democracy and into a tradition bound version of Confucianism , but at best it 's only a superficial reading.The discussion can go on and deeper but one current salient point should be made .
Chinese society is observed to be much more family orientated than our western societies .
A recent rampage killing in the international press was reported on as having happened in western societies because the killer was deranged , whereas the Chinese feedback suggested the man went on a killing spree because his family was n't there to support him .
Western society is strongly vested in the rights of the individual , China not nearly so much .
If the West and China and , perhaps much of Asia , are to achieve an equilibrium than we 're going to have to bridge this core cultural divide from both sides.just my loose change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>E.O.Wilson wrote an essay in the late 90's suggesting China is the test case for humanity's attempts to find solutions to environmental and population problems.
China as a traditional agrarian male dominated culture has moved from a practise of female infanticide to using technology to abort female foetuses.
From this practise a sex ratio imbalance has arisen that some see as of little current or historical importance.
The nation's one-child policy could leave 24 million bachelors by the year 2020 [discovery.com].
My own readings in history have taken on views more in line from what has been learnt from the last few decades of research in primatology [wikipedia.org].
Chimpanzee behaviour favouring, figuratively speaking, male oligarchies restricting access to resources maps clearly, in my mind, onto all three, still widely practised, Mediterranean death cult religions promulgating male dominated societies.
Based on China's current sex ratio imbalance the questions to be addressed probably can be set in historical, anthropological and primatological contexts.
Personally I suspect China flirted with democracy, but as is nearly always the case, power structures are not given to relinquishing dominion.
Recently /.
ran a story that the Chinese government replaced the movie "Avatar" with a biography of Confucius [stanford.edu].
The works of Confucius are only known by way of reconstructions, but his core message seems to have been one of a familia philosophy, strongly patriarchal, and, in that light, like the Christian, Islamic and Judaic cults that I find map well onto Chimpanzee behaviour.
The core mandate of such power structures is submission and tradition.
I suspect the Chinese government, if not the Chinese people, are moving away from democracy and into a tradition bound version of Confucianism, but at best it's only a superficial reading.The discussion can go on and deeper but one current salient point should be made.
Chinese society is observed to be much more family orientated than our western societies.
A recent rampage killing in the international press was reported on as having happened in western societies because the killer was deranged, whereas the Chinese feedback suggested the man went on a killing spree because his family wasn't there to support him.
Western society is strongly vested in the rights of the individual, China not nearly so much.
If the West and China and, perhaps much of Asia, are to achieve an equilibrium than we're going to have to bridge this core cultural divide from both sides.just my loose change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892796</id>
	<title>Re:One day</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1264444500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The good thing is thing is that currently things in China are better than they where during the Cultural Revolution.</p></div><p>Only because most people are good little citizens (with exception of google.cn users and these evil human rights proponents).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The good thing is thing is that currently things in China are better than they where during the Cultural Revolution.Only because most people are good little citizens ( with exception of google.cn users and these evil human rights proponents ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The good thing is thing is that currently things in China are better than they where during the Cultural Revolution.Only because most people are good little citizens (with exception of google.cn users and these evil human rights proponents).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892632</id>
	<title>Re:One day</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1264443780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice thought but it keeps happening again and again. The good thing is thing is that currently things in China are better than they where during the Cultural Revolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice thought but it keeps happening again and again .
The good thing is thing is that currently things in China are better than they where during the Cultural Revolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice thought but it keeps happening again and again.
The good thing is thing is that currently things in China are better than they where during the Cultural Revolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894666</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously?</title>
	<author>StillNeedMoreCoffee</author>
	<datestamp>1264452960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had one of my Chinese neices come visit for a summer a few years back. She spent a year studying in England as well. When she was asked recently if she would like to come to the USA or stay in China, she said without hesitation stay in China.  Beijing is a very modern city now in just the last 20 years totally re-done. The little emperors (single child family children) know they have it good now. Not revolution for awhile I suspect.  The countryside has been getting much better too, although still very third world but the transitions are amazing is such a short time.  Not to condone the actions of the Chinese government but they are on an economic role.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had one of my Chinese neices come visit for a summer a few years back .
She spent a year studying in England as well .
When she was asked recently if she would like to come to the USA or stay in China , she said without hesitation stay in China .
Beijing is a very modern city now in just the last 20 years totally re-done .
The little emperors ( single child family children ) know they have it good now .
Not revolution for awhile I suspect .
The countryside has been getting much better too , although still very third world but the transitions are amazing is such a short time .
Not to condone the actions of the Chinese government but they are on an economic role .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had one of my Chinese neices come visit for a summer a few years back.
She spent a year studying in England as well.
When she was asked recently if she would like to come to the USA or stay in China, she said without hesitation stay in China.
Beijing is a very modern city now in just the last 20 years totally re-done.
The little emperors (single child family children) know they have it good now.
Not revolution for awhile I suspect.
The countryside has been getting much better too, although still very third world but the transitions are amazing is such a short time.
Not to condone the actions of the Chinese government but they are on an economic role.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893386</id>
	<title>Re:Unlikely but possible alternative</title>
	<author>vxice</author>
	<datestamp>1264447260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Anyone wanting to oppose China's rights abuses wouldn't attack those pages"  only if they saw it as a minor inconvenience to those organizations and the attack did not last long.  If you are some shifty vigilantly group  that no one knows about then you have little to loose and possibly a lot to gain if it is convincing enough that china was behind the attack. And if the end justifies the means...</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Anyone wanting to oppose China 's rights abuses would n't attack those pages " only if they saw it as a minor inconvenience to those organizations and the attack did not last long .
If you are some shifty vigilantly group that no one knows about then you have little to loose and possibly a lot to gain if it is convincing enough that china was behind the attack .
And if the end justifies the means.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Anyone wanting to oppose China's rights abuses wouldn't attack those pages"  only if they saw it as a minor inconvenience to those organizations and the attack did not last long.
If you are some shifty vigilantly group  that no one knows about then you have little to loose and possibly a lot to gain if it is convincing enough that china was behind the attack.
And if the end justifies the means...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30895222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30902164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_167208_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30895744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30895744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892978
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893280
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892954
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896034
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894328
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898212
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893840
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892830
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892358
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893006
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896106
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894302
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897484
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30895222
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898362
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30894970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30898812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30902164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892650
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892632
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892418
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893288
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30893564
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892362
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_167208.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30896506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30897988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_167208.30892844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
