<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_28_1211228</id>
	<title>Trojan Kill Switches In Military Technology</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256733960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Nrbelex writes <i>"The New York Times reports in this week's Science section that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/science/27trojan.html">hardware and software trojan kill switches</a> in military devices are an increasing concern, and may have already been used. 'A 2007 Israeli Air Force attack on a suspected, partly-constructed Syrian nuclear reactor led to speculation about why the Syrian air defense system did not respond to the Israeli aircraft. Accounts of the event initially indicated that sophisticated jamming technology was used to blind the radars. Last December, however, a report in an American technical publication, IEEE Spectrum, cited a European industry source in raising the possibility that the Israelis might have used a built-in kill switch to shut down the radars. Separately, an American semiconductor industry executive said in an interview that he had direct knowledge of the operation and that the technology for disabling the radars was supplied by Americans to the Israeli electronic intelligence agency, Unit 8200.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nrbelex writes " The New York Times reports in this week 's Science section that hardware and software trojan kill switches in military devices are an increasing concern , and may have already been used .
'A 2007 Israeli Air Force attack on a suspected , partly-constructed Syrian nuclear reactor led to speculation about why the Syrian air defense system did not respond to the Israeli aircraft .
Accounts of the event initially indicated that sophisticated jamming technology was used to blind the radars .
Last December , however , a report in an American technical publication , IEEE Spectrum , cited a European industry source in raising the possibility that the Israelis might have used a built-in kill switch to shut down the radars .
Separately , an American semiconductor industry executive said in an interview that he had direct knowledge of the operation and that the technology for disabling the radars was supplied by Americans to the Israeli electronic intelligence agency , Unit 8200 .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nrbelex writes "The New York Times reports in this week's Science section that hardware and software trojan kill switches in military devices are an increasing concern, and may have already been used.
'A 2007 Israeli Air Force attack on a suspected, partly-constructed Syrian nuclear reactor led to speculation about why the Syrian air defense system did not respond to the Israeli aircraft.
Accounts of the event initially indicated that sophisticated jamming technology was used to blind the radars.
Last December, however, a report in an American technical publication, IEEE Spectrum, cited a European industry source in raising the possibility that the Israelis might have used a built-in kill switch to shut down the radars.
Separately, an American semiconductor industry executive said in an interview that he had direct knowledge of the operation and that the technology for disabling the radars was supplied by Americans to the Israeli electronic intelligence agency, Unit 8200.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895811</id>
	<title>Don't buy weapons from your enemies?</title>
	<author>Seth Kriticos</author>
	<datestamp>1256738400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, if you are going to wage war, it is a very bad idea to buy non trivial weapons systems from your enemy or his allies. Actually it's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100\% on your side. Best would be to build it yourself.</p><p>Those amateur war mongering folks down there. Still don't think that anyone is learning out of it, I mean, where are the chips for NATO equipment come from? Oh yea, who manufactures them cheapest. How does this make sense in the context?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , if you are going to wage war , it is a very bad idea to buy non trivial weapons systems from your enemy or his allies .
Actually it 's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100 \ % on your side .
Best would be to build it yourself.Those amateur war mongering folks down there .
Still do n't think that anyone is learning out of it , I mean , where are the chips for NATO equipment come from ?
Oh yea , who manufactures them cheapest .
How does this make sense in the context ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, if you are going to wage war, it is a very bad idea to buy non trivial weapons systems from your enemy or his allies.
Actually it's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100\% on your side.
Best would be to build it yourself.Those amateur war mongering folks down there.
Still don't think that anyone is learning out of it, I mean, where are the chips for NATO equipment come from?
Oh yea, who manufactures them cheapest.
How does this make sense in the context?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898963</id>
	<title>It's a good thing we build all the weapons then</title>
	<author>SeePage87</author>
	<datestamp>1256751600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or most of them, anyhow.  Wow, that's clever though.  We've been trying to decide the outcome of wars around the world pretty regularly since WWII, this just provides a very efficient means of doing so.  It also gives a big disincentive for people buying US weapons on the black market (well, the really bad ones).</p><p>Of course there's always the fear of hackers figuring out a way to kill the kill switch, but at least it's one more obstacle.  It'd probably be a good idea to ensure none of our craft, etc, have these kill switches though, just the ones we sell. I'm sure we try very very hard to protect the switches, but security systems of all kinds get broken, it's easier to find exploits than it is to create a system that has none whatsoever.  If lives (potentially thousands or more) depend on it, why take the chance?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or most of them , anyhow .
Wow , that 's clever though .
We 've been trying to decide the outcome of wars around the world pretty regularly since WWII , this just provides a very efficient means of doing so .
It also gives a big disincentive for people buying US weapons on the black market ( well , the really bad ones ) .Of course there 's always the fear of hackers figuring out a way to kill the kill switch , but at least it 's one more obstacle .
It 'd probably be a good idea to ensure none of our craft , etc , have these kill switches though , just the ones we sell .
I 'm sure we try very very hard to protect the switches , but security systems of all kinds get broken , it 's easier to find exploits than it is to create a system that has none whatsoever .
If lives ( potentially thousands or more ) depend on it , why take the chance ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or most of them, anyhow.
Wow, that's clever though.
We've been trying to decide the outcome of wars around the world pretty regularly since WWII, this just provides a very efficient means of doing so.
It also gives a big disincentive for people buying US weapons on the black market (well, the really bad ones).Of course there's always the fear of hackers figuring out a way to kill the kill switch, but at least it's one more obstacle.
It'd probably be a good idea to ensure none of our craft, etc, have these kill switches though, just the ones we sell.
I'm sure we try very very hard to protect the switches, but security systems of all kinds get broken, it's easier to find exploits than it is to create a system that has none whatsoever.
If lives (potentially thousands or more) depend on it, why take the chance?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900641</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256758260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't this the plot of "The International?" The arms dealer sold the  Chinese missiles but also then sold the counter measure at the same time to the opposite side?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this the plot of " The International ?
" The arms dealer sold the Chinese missiles but also then sold the counter measure at the same time to the opposite side ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this the plot of "The International?
" The arms dealer sold the  Chinese missiles but also then sold the counter measure at the same time to the opposite side?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897535</id>
	<title>Kill Switches in the Silicon</title>
	<author>DesertNomad</author>
	<datestamp>1256745600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My experience is with very complex and extremely common silicon wireless transceivers, including RF, PHY, MAC, NWK and even applications functions. 6 to 40 mm^2 of extremely dense circuitry (millions to tens of millions of gates). It would be very easy to put into that a block that would be nearly undetectable and that would cause the transceiver to change its behavior when specific sequences are received over the air. In a major metro area, a single broadcast message could shut down tens of thousands of cellphones or wi-fi devices. For weapons that use that part, it could quickly be "Phaser on OVERLOAD!"
That having been said, when we do a design and send the design files overseas to third-party fabs in Asia, it is hard for them to be able to modify anything since the finished part will be different than our design file. But, I suppose if you had the money, resources, and desire for total world domination, anything's possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My experience is with very complex and extremely common silicon wireless transceivers , including RF , PHY , MAC , NWK and even applications functions .
6 to 40 mm ^ 2 of extremely dense circuitry ( millions to tens of millions of gates ) .
It would be very easy to put into that a block that would be nearly undetectable and that would cause the transceiver to change its behavior when specific sequences are received over the air .
In a major metro area , a single broadcast message could shut down tens of thousands of cellphones or wi-fi devices .
For weapons that use that part , it could quickly be " Phaser on OVERLOAD !
" That having been said , when we do a design and send the design files overseas to third-party fabs in Asia , it is hard for them to be able to modify anything since the finished part will be different than our design file .
But , I suppose if you had the money , resources , and desire for total world domination , anything 's possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My experience is with very complex and extremely common silicon wireless transceivers, including RF, PHY, MAC, NWK and even applications functions.
6 to 40 mm^2 of extremely dense circuitry (millions to tens of millions of gates).
It would be very easy to put into that a block that would be nearly undetectable and that would cause the transceiver to change its behavior when specific sequences are received over the air.
In a major metro area, a single broadcast message could shut down tens of thousands of cellphones or wi-fi devices.
For weapons that use that part, it could quickly be "Phaser on OVERLOAD!
"
That having been said, when we do a design and send the design files overseas to third-party fabs in Asia, it is hard for them to be able to modify anything since the finished part will be different than our design file.
But, I suppose if you had the money, resources, and desire for total world domination, anything's possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897115</id>
	<title>F16-IN</title>
	<author>sskang</author>
	<datestamp>1256743920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is why I oppose the purchase of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-16\_Fighting\_Falcon#F-16IN" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">F-16IN</a> [wikipedia.org] by India. It's a capable aircraft from what I understand and fits the MRCA requirements of the IAF, but I really really doubt that after facing its own gear in Gulf War I, the US is going to provide any country with sophisticated arms without a kill switch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I oppose the purchase of the F-16IN [ wikipedia.org ] by India .
It 's a capable aircraft from what I understand and fits the MRCA requirements of the IAF , but I really really doubt that after facing its own gear in Gulf War I , the US is going to provide any country with sophisticated arms without a kill switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I oppose the purchase of the F-16IN [wikipedia.org] by India.
It's a capable aircraft from what I understand and fits the MRCA requirements of the IAF, but I really really doubt that after facing its own gear in Gulf War I, the US is going to provide any country with sophisticated arms without a kill switch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895963</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are you a retard ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are you a retard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are you a retard ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900493</id>
	<title>Re:Semiconductor Executive Should Be Investigated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256757720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the contrary, we need more brave souls like him.</p><p>Let's be clear on this, in a free country the government does not get to have secrets. That includes the military.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the contrary , we need more brave souls like him.Let 's be clear on this , in a free country the government does not get to have secrets .
That includes the military .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the contrary, we need more brave souls like him.Let's be clear on this, in a free country the government does not get to have secrets.
That includes the military.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29913639</id>
	<title>Faraday cage?</title>
	<author>bensch128</author>
	<datestamp>1256843400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't get it.</p><p>It the malicious circuity has to be triggered externally and it's unknown when it'll be used, that means that either:<br>(1) hackers have to get into a network linked to the hardware or<br>(2) there has to be an external radio signal which can disable the hardware or<br>(3) The hardware (radar in this case) doesn't validate it's input well enough and is open to buffer overflows/ bad execution based on invalid input.</p><p>From what I've read, the Israelis exploited (3) in order to disable the syrians radar systems.<br>It seems to me that the syrians bought just plain crappy radar systems and then never bothered to test or "fuzz" them.</p><p>However, the article seems to be going crazy over (2). However, a simple faraday cage should be good enough to defeat that kind of attack.<br>It'll create a barrier between the inside of the container and the outside. No EM radiation goes in, no EM radiation goes out.<br>Any kind of circuity triggered by EM would be defeated. And by definition, any circuity triggered by time is useless because it's impossible to determine when in the future, it'll be required.</p><p>And (1) is easily defended against by not connecting your critical defense hardware to any network of any kind. Or by using 3rd party firewalls which have not been made in China/Russia/Iran...</p><p>So this is much todo about nothing IMHO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't get it.It the malicious circuity has to be triggered externally and it 's unknown when it 'll be used , that means that either : ( 1 ) hackers have to get into a network linked to the hardware or ( 2 ) there has to be an external radio signal which can disable the hardware or ( 3 ) The hardware ( radar in this case ) does n't validate it 's input well enough and is open to buffer overflows/ bad execution based on invalid input.From what I 've read , the Israelis exploited ( 3 ) in order to disable the syrians radar systems.It seems to me that the syrians bought just plain crappy radar systems and then never bothered to test or " fuzz " them.However , the article seems to be going crazy over ( 2 ) .
However , a simple faraday cage should be good enough to defeat that kind of attack.It 'll create a barrier between the inside of the container and the outside .
No EM radiation goes in , no EM radiation goes out.Any kind of circuity triggered by EM would be defeated .
And by definition , any circuity triggered by time is useless because it 's impossible to determine when in the future , it 'll be required.And ( 1 ) is easily defended against by not connecting your critical defense hardware to any network of any kind .
Or by using 3rd party firewalls which have not been made in China/Russia/Iran...So this is much todo about nothing IMHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't get it.It the malicious circuity has to be triggered externally and it's unknown when it'll be used, that means that either:(1) hackers have to get into a network linked to the hardware or(2) there has to be an external radio signal which can disable the hardware or(3) The hardware (radar in this case) doesn't validate it's input well enough and is open to buffer overflows/ bad execution based on invalid input.From what I've read, the Israelis exploited (3) in order to disable the syrians radar systems.It seems to me that the syrians bought just plain crappy radar systems and then never bothered to test or "fuzz" them.However, the article seems to be going crazy over (2).
However, a simple faraday cage should be good enough to defeat that kind of attack.It'll create a barrier between the inside of the container and the outside.
No EM radiation goes in, no EM radiation goes out.Any kind of circuity triggered by EM would be defeated.
And by definition, any circuity triggered by time is useless because it's impossible to determine when in the future, it'll be required.And (1) is easily defended against by not connecting your critical defense hardware to any network of any kind.
Or by using 3rd party firewalls which have not been made in China/Russia/Iran...So this is much todo about nothing IMHO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898591</id>
	<title>Re:Semiconductor Executive Should Be Investigated</title>
	<author>Rorschach1</author>
	<datestamp>1256750040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...and how long the executive should serve."</p><p>Senators serve six-year terms.  If he wants to stay in longer than that, he'll need to run for re-election.  Haven't you figured out how this works yet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...and how long the executive should serve .
" Senators serve six-year terms .
If he wants to stay in longer than that , he 'll need to run for re-election .
Have n't you figured out how this works yet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...and how long the executive should serve.
"Senators serve six-year terms.
If he wants to stay in longer than that, he'll need to run for re-election.
Haven't you figured out how this works yet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896293</id>
	<title>Reminds me of David Gerrold's Rage for Revenge</title>
	<author>Kostya</author>
	<datestamp>1256740800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Gerrold's Chtorr series, they used this.  A lot of US military tech was in the hands of rebels, and they just deployed a kill switch.  But in the book, it was expressed as a last-ditch measure.  Once you use it, everyone knows about it, and you lose the advantage.  Suddenly all the US allies were very, very concerned, as they began to wonder what US technology wasn't booby trapped.</p><p>I'd be really surprised we'd just hand this over to the Israelis if we had it.  I'd think we would be saving this for a major military catastrophe for the US--kind of a "oh crap, we are up against the wall and this is our only hope of stopping the enemy."  Because you only get to use it once with real effectiveness.  Blowing it on a raid by another country (who would have taken them out anyways) seems stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Gerrold 's Chtorr series , they used this .
A lot of US military tech was in the hands of rebels , and they just deployed a kill switch .
But in the book , it was expressed as a last-ditch measure .
Once you use it , everyone knows about it , and you lose the advantage .
Suddenly all the US allies were very , very concerned , as they began to wonder what US technology was n't booby trapped.I 'd be really surprised we 'd just hand this over to the Israelis if we had it .
I 'd think we would be saving this for a major military catastrophe for the US--kind of a " oh crap , we are up against the wall and this is our only hope of stopping the enemy .
" Because you only get to use it once with real effectiveness .
Blowing it on a raid by another country ( who would have taken them out anyways ) seems stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Gerrold's Chtorr series, they used this.
A lot of US military tech was in the hands of rebels, and they just deployed a kill switch.
But in the book, it was expressed as a last-ditch measure.
Once you use it, everyone knows about it, and you lose the advantage.
Suddenly all the US allies were very, very concerned, as they began to wonder what US technology wasn't booby trapped.I'd be really surprised we'd just hand this over to the Israelis if we had it.
I'd think we would be saving this for a major military catastrophe for the US--kind of a "oh crap, we are up against the wall and this is our only hope of stopping the enemy.
"  Because you only get to use it once with real effectiveness.
Blowing it on a raid by another country (who would have taken them out anyways) seems stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899419</id>
	<title>Re:Syrians have U.S. military hardware ?</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1256753760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>American Business Plan.</p><p>1) Sell the world military technology with kill switches<br>2) ???<br>3) Profit!!!</p><p>Alternate ending: Replace "???" with "Invade"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>American Business Plan.1 ) Sell the world military technology with kill switches2 ) ? ?
? 3 ) Profit ! !
! Alternate ending : Replace " ? ? ?
" with " Invade "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>American Business Plan.1) Sell the world military technology with kill switches2) ??
?3) Profit!!
!Alternate ending: Replace "???
" with "Invade"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898859</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Lord Kano</author>
	<datestamp>1256751240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</i></p><p>Yeah, because we all know how the Americans would NEVER come to Europe's aid in an emergency.</p><p>LK</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software.Yeah , because we all know how the Americans would NEVER come to Europe 's aid in an emergency.LK</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.Yeah, because we all know how the Americans would NEVER come to Europe's aid in an emergency.LK</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897849</id>
	<title>Disinformation</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1256746860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's all that needs to be said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all that needs to be said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all that needs to be said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</id>
	<title>Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1256738040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself. Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.</p><p>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries , do it yourself .
Especially if you ever under any way , shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself.
Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897299</id>
	<title>Israel beware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope Israel insists on having access to all of the source code in the equipment they buy from us because we've historically been Israel's only friend; everyone else moronically supports the Islamic jihad buying into the bullshit that "Islam is a religion of peace" not realizing that one of the tenets of Islam is abrogation: if something Mohammed wrote later contradicts with something he wrote previously, the newer doctrine applies. Early in the Koran Islam IS very peaceful but later on it tells Muslims to go first after the Jews (orthodox and messianic), then after the "sunday people" (meaning Christians) because Christians are friends to us (Jews).</p><p>Why do I hope Israel gets the source? Because all of our currently produced fighters, missiles, radars, and so forth can be disabled remotely. With Obama, who is a Muslim sympathizer and anti-Israel, being commander in chief of the USA, I really believe we're about to turn our backs on Israel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope Israel insists on having access to all of the source code in the equipment they buy from us because we 've historically been Israel 's only friend ; everyone else moronically supports the Islamic jihad buying into the bullshit that " Islam is a religion of peace " not realizing that one of the tenets of Islam is abrogation : if something Mohammed wrote later contradicts with something he wrote previously , the newer doctrine applies .
Early in the Koran Islam IS very peaceful but later on it tells Muslims to go first after the Jews ( orthodox and messianic ) , then after the " sunday people " ( meaning Christians ) because Christians are friends to us ( Jews ) .Why do I hope Israel gets the source ?
Because all of our currently produced fighters , missiles , radars , and so forth can be disabled remotely .
With Obama , who is a Muslim sympathizer and anti-Israel , being commander in chief of the USA , I really believe we 're about to turn our backs on Israel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope Israel insists on having access to all of the source code in the equipment they buy from us because we've historically been Israel's only friend; everyone else moronically supports the Islamic jihad buying into the bullshit that "Islam is a religion of peace" not realizing that one of the tenets of Islam is abrogation: if something Mohammed wrote later contradicts with something he wrote previously, the newer doctrine applies.
Early in the Koran Islam IS very peaceful but later on it tells Muslims to go first after the Jews (orthodox and messianic), then after the "sunday people" (meaning Christians) because Christians are friends to us (Jews).Why do I hope Israel gets the source?
Because all of our currently produced fighters, missiles, radars, and so forth can be disabled remotely.
With Obama, who is a Muslim sympathizer and anti-Israel, being commander in chief of the USA, I really believe we're about to turn our backs on Israel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29901565</id>
	<title>and there will be Trojan Boot Loaders (C)</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1256762520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>a French Diplomat had a slip of tongue: we can switch off our Exocet missiles!<p>
a NATO airbase commander in Chief confirmed: pilots not following orders will be switched off from airplane control and flown home by RC ( eject seat disabled )</p><p>
the UK requested the source code of the joint tactical fighter and threatened not to buy it!</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><p>
I can imagine ( but no proof ) that the US asks network device producers to include a little Trojan Boot Loader (TBL)!</p><p>
In a router or a switch this TBL listens to traffic for a initializing command hidden in a packet - most likely coming from a web-search engine.</p><p> it can be specifically targeted by its serial number.</p><p>
So if there is something going on in Tuizerland<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) get the serial number of their routers and send to the TBL commands to load spyware from packets hidden in unsuspicious answers coming from Google/Yahoo/MSN etc...</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><p>
If I want to know what company XYZ has in its drawers: what is the serial number of their switches?</p><p>The data wanted is added to the search query to one of the Web-services !</p><p>

recommendation: if you have anything which might be interesting - have your network devices software compiled by yourself or trustworthy AND verifyable sources.</p><p>

To the military: do your software yourself or your vendor may switch your weapon off!
.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a French Diplomat had a slip of tongue : we can switch off our Exocet missiles !
a NATO airbase commander in Chief confirmed : pilots not following orders will be switched off from airplane control and flown home by RC ( eject seat disabled ) the UK requested the source code of the joint tactical fighter and threatened not to buy it !
. I can imagine ( but no proof ) that the US asks network device producers to include a little Trojan Boot Loader ( TBL ) !
In a router or a switch this TBL listens to traffic for a initializing command hidden in a packet - most likely coming from a web-search engine .
it can be specifically targeted by its serial number .
So if there is something going on in Tuizerland ; - ) get the serial number of their routers and send to the TBL commands to load spyware from packets hidden in unsuspicious answers coming from Google/Yahoo/MSN etc... . If I want to know what company XYZ has in its drawers : what is the serial number of their switches ? The data wanted is added to the search query to one of the Web-services !
recommendation : if you have anything which might be interesting - have your network devices software compiled by yourself or trustworthy AND verifyable sources .
To the military : do your software yourself or your vendor may switch your weapon off !
.</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a French Diplomat had a slip of tongue: we can switch off our Exocet missiles!
a NATO airbase commander in Chief confirmed: pilots not following orders will be switched off from airplane control and flown home by RC ( eject seat disabled )
the UK requested the source code of the joint tactical fighter and threatened not to buy it!
.
I can imagine ( but no proof ) that the US asks network device producers to include a little Trojan Boot Loader (TBL)!
In a router or a switch this TBL listens to traffic for a initializing command hidden in a packet - most likely coming from a web-search engine.
it can be specifically targeted by its serial number.
So if there is something going on in Tuizerland ;-) get the serial number of their routers and send to the TBL commands to load spyware from packets hidden in unsuspicious answers coming from Google/Yahoo/MSN etc... .
If I want to know what company XYZ has in its drawers: what is the serial number of their switches?The data wanted is added to the search query to one of the Web-services !
recommendation: if you have anything which might be interesting - have your network devices software compiled by yourself or trustworthy AND verifyable sources.
To the military: do your software yourself or your vendor may switch your weapon off!
.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29908517</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>dajak</author>
	<datestamp>1256820480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>US military requirements for chips do not exceed 20\% of worldwide production capacity. The US military could use only locally produced chips if it wanted to, but at the expense of more taxpayer money, and stimulation of the economy is a bad reason to waste money. Preparing yourself for the eventuality that the whole world will turn against you is not a sound Keynesian investment; It's just plain paranoid. Even the ability to take on the rest 0f the world together with you allies is an unprecedented and unique luxury.</p><p>ASML (Netherlands), Nikon, and Canon (both Japanese) together have a market share of over 95\% in semiconductor lithography machines. Strategically this seems to me more important than semiconductor manufacturing using the machines of one of these three suppliers. Both countries are allies of the US, and will most likely remain allies in the foreseeable future if the US behaves not too unreasonably. Intel and AMD are US companies, and design state-of-the-art chips in the US. There is hardly an immediate risk of the US losing access to knowledge about semiconductor manufacturing, and the country most able to embed kill switches into other country's military hardware is still the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>US military requirements for chips do not exceed 20 \ % of worldwide production capacity .
The US military could use only locally produced chips if it wanted to , but at the expense of more taxpayer money , and stimulation of the economy is a bad reason to waste money .
Preparing yourself for the eventuality that the whole world will turn against you is not a sound Keynesian investment ; It 's just plain paranoid .
Even the ability to take on the rest 0f the world together with you allies is an unprecedented and unique luxury.ASML ( Netherlands ) , Nikon , and Canon ( both Japanese ) together have a market share of over 95 \ % in semiconductor lithography machines .
Strategically this seems to me more important than semiconductor manufacturing using the machines of one of these three suppliers .
Both countries are allies of the US , and will most likely remain allies in the foreseeable future if the US behaves not too unreasonably .
Intel and AMD are US companies , and design state-of-the-art chips in the US .
There is hardly an immediate risk of the US losing access to knowledge about semiconductor manufacturing , and the country most able to embed kill switches into other country 's military hardware is still the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>US military requirements for chips do not exceed 20\% of worldwide production capacity.
The US military could use only locally produced chips if it wanted to, but at the expense of more taxpayer money, and stimulation of the economy is a bad reason to waste money.
Preparing yourself for the eventuality that the whole world will turn against you is not a sound Keynesian investment; It's just plain paranoid.
Even the ability to take on the rest 0f the world together with you allies is an unprecedented and unique luxury.ASML (Netherlands), Nikon, and Canon (both Japanese) together have a market share of over 95\% in semiconductor lithography machines.
Strategically this seems to me more important than semiconductor manufacturing using the machines of one of these three suppliers.
Both countries are allies of the US, and will most likely remain allies in the foreseeable future if the US behaves not too unreasonably.
Intel and AMD are US companies, and design state-of-the-art chips in the US.
There is hardly an immediate risk of the US losing access to knowledge about semiconductor manufacturing, and the country most able to embed kill switches into other country's military hardware is still the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897951</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese and Windows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256747220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LOL!  I'd expect a good bit or corporate espionage if that were true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL !
I 'd expect a good bit or corporate espionage if that were true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL!
I'd expect a good bit or corporate espionage if that were true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896451</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Mark\_in\_Brazil</author>
	<datestamp>1256741340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself. Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.</p><p>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</p></div><p>I found it very upsetting to learn that the Brazilian government set up a PKI, but bought all the components for the vault with the root private key from US vendors. </p><p>I went inside that vault to install the network synchronization server that gets the time from the Brazilian National Observatory and makes sure the machines inside the vault are set to Brazilian Legal Time, and I was impressed with the security measures the Brazilian government had taken, but I was just shocked that they would buy components, for example, from a foreign company that has ties to the NSA and is called Spy-R-Us (Spyrus).</p><p>In the end, I doubt the foreign-bought components have compromised the security of the Brazilian government's root CA private key, but I was surprised that there wasn't more of a push to use Brazilian-made equipment.  I apparently wasn't the only one, because Brazil created a project to develop its own <b>open</b> cryptographic platform.  It's called the "Jo&#227;o-de-Barro Project," named for a South American bird that builds its own house out of mud. The software parts of that project have been used to generate a new AC root keypair.  I believe a Brazilian-designed HSM already exists, but I'm a little bit behind, because I stopped working actively with cryptographic hardware a couple of years ago.  But I think <a href="http://kryptus.com/site/index.php?option=com\_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=12&amp;Itemid=32" title="kryptus.com">this</a> [kryptus.com] might be it (page in Portuguese, for obvious reasons).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries , do it yourself .
Especially if you ever under any way , shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software.I found it very upsetting to learn that the Brazilian government set up a PKI , but bought all the components for the vault with the root private key from US vendors .
I went inside that vault to install the network synchronization server that gets the time from the Brazilian National Observatory and makes sure the machines inside the vault are set to Brazilian Legal Time , and I was impressed with the security measures the Brazilian government had taken , but I was just shocked that they would buy components , for example , from a foreign company that has ties to the NSA and is called Spy-R-Us ( Spyrus ) .In the end , I doubt the foreign-bought components have compromised the security of the Brazilian government 's root CA private key , but I was surprised that there was n't more of a push to use Brazilian-made equipment .
I apparently was n't the only one , because Brazil created a project to develop its own open cryptographic platform .
It 's called the " Jo   o-de-Barro Project , " named for a South American bird that builds its own house out of mud .
The software parts of that project have been used to generate a new AC root keypair .
I believe a Brazilian-designed HSM already exists , but I 'm a little bit behind , because I stopped working actively with cryptographic hardware a couple of years ago .
But I think this [ kryptus.com ] might be it ( page in Portuguese , for obvious reasons ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself.
Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.I found it very upsetting to learn that the Brazilian government set up a PKI, but bought all the components for the vault with the root private key from US vendors.
I went inside that vault to install the network synchronization server that gets the time from the Brazilian National Observatory and makes sure the machines inside the vault are set to Brazilian Legal Time, and I was impressed with the security measures the Brazilian government had taken, but I was just shocked that they would buy components, for example, from a foreign company that has ties to the NSA and is called Spy-R-Us (Spyrus).In the end, I doubt the foreign-bought components have compromised the security of the Brazilian government's root CA private key, but I was surprised that there wasn't more of a push to use Brazilian-made equipment.
I apparently wasn't the only one, because Brazil created a project to develop its own open cryptographic platform.
It's called the "João-de-Barro Project," named for a South American bird that builds its own house out of mud.
The software parts of that project have been used to generate a new AC root keypair.
I believe a Brazilian-designed HSM already exists, but I'm a little bit behind, because I stopped working actively with cryptographic hardware a couple of years ago.
But I think this [kryptus.com] might be it (page in Portuguese, for obvious reasons).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895777</id>
	<title>This will stimulate growth in the weapons industry</title>
	<author>samjam</author>
	<datestamp>1256738280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This will stimulate growth in the weapons industry, and therefore growth in espionage operations, increase the likelyhood of serious diplomatic incidents and therefore War.</p><p>That's War with a capital W were the enemy has equipment that is not under your control.</p><p>So it's a nice idea, but it only works in the short term - i.e. until you use it. Then the clock ticks to when it's useless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This will stimulate growth in the weapons industry , and therefore growth in espionage operations , increase the likelyhood of serious diplomatic incidents and therefore War.That 's War with a capital W were the enemy has equipment that is not under your control.So it 's a nice idea , but it only works in the short term - i.e .
until you use it .
Then the clock ticks to when it 's useless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This will stimulate growth in the weapons industry, and therefore growth in espionage operations, increase the likelyhood of serious diplomatic incidents and therefore War.That's War with a capital W were the enemy has equipment that is not under your control.So it's a nice idea, but it only works in the short term - i.e.
until you use it.
Then the clock ticks to when it's useless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898605</id>
	<title>Re:uhh...Russian technology</title>
	<author>arthurpaliden</author>
	<datestamp>1256750100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Components. American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN! "<br>
Lev Andropov, Armageddon</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Components .
American components , Russian Components , ALL MADE IN TAIWAN !
" Lev Andropov , Armageddon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Components.
American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!
"
Lev Andropov, Armageddon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898951</id>
	<title>Re:The Syrian radar disable code:</title>
	<author>Veramocor</author>
	<datestamp>1256751600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I herby revoke your nerdcore cards to everyone who did not get the wrath of kahn reference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I herby revoke your nerdcore cards to everyone who did not get the wrath of kahn reference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I herby revoke your nerdcore cards to everyone who did not get the wrath of kahn reference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900529</id>
	<title>RF-ID &amp; Need to track to 2nd and beyond equipm</title>
	<author>turtleshadow</author>
	<datestamp>1256757840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect that a kill switch doesn't necessarily have to be in a critical component of any system. If its in a secondary or tertiary system in a critical path trigging that could disrupt or disable the primary use.</p><p>In the IT industry if I want to take down a website why bother with attacking the primary machine if the low level infrastructure is vulnerable; such as chillers, aircon, EPS which often have some sort of control &amp; monitoring I could tap into if I found the right access point.</p><p>If anything an attacker could cause a 3 mile island type scenario of disrupting telemetry to force a reaction of the primary system by an operator with an attack upon a low level system.</p><p>Sending the right radiation signal to the kill switch of the aircon unit on a radar station in the middle of the Med could naturally overheat the signal processing equipment thereby disabling it.</p><p>Now with RF-ID chips possibly disguised into a complex circuit you just can't have to look at the code you have to examine every part and chip die.<br>Not only that I wonder if the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mil spooks have already figured out which chips and circuits by their design can be overloaded with targeted radiation to shut them down. Really they are not "designed" kill switches but have found to be weak points in the shielding and are vulnerable to external attack causing the primary system to fail as a side affect.</p><p>This is Tom Clancy &amp; James Bond stuff.</p><p>Would be cooler if Israel sent jets to  the edge of the boarder and when Syrian launched they would send Syrian missiles back into Syria by faking out Syria's own guidance and radar then just fly back home untouched -- The press release would read "oops we just got lost and your stuff got blown up by your own guys -- too bad."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect that a kill switch does n't necessarily have to be in a critical component of any system .
If its in a secondary or tertiary system in a critical path trigging that could disrupt or disable the primary use.In the IT industry if I want to take down a website why bother with attacking the primary machine if the low level infrastructure is vulnerable ; such as chillers , aircon , EPS which often have some sort of control &amp; monitoring I could tap into if I found the right access point.If anything an attacker could cause a 3 mile island type scenario of disrupting telemetry to force a reaction of the primary system by an operator with an attack upon a low level system.Sending the right radiation signal to the kill switch of the aircon unit on a radar station in the middle of the Med could naturally overheat the signal processing equipment thereby disabling it.Now with RF-ID chips possibly disguised into a complex circuit you just ca n't have to look at the code you have to examine every part and chip die.Not only that I wonder if the .mil spooks have already figured out which chips and circuits by their design can be overloaded with targeted radiation to shut them down .
Really they are not " designed " kill switches but have found to be weak points in the shielding and are vulnerable to external attack causing the primary system to fail as a side affect.This is Tom Clancy &amp; James Bond stuff.Would be cooler if Israel sent jets to the edge of the boarder and when Syrian launched they would send Syrian missiles back into Syria by faking out Syria 's own guidance and radar then just fly back home untouched -- The press release would read " oops we just got lost and your stuff got blown up by your own guys -- too bad .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect that a kill switch doesn't necessarily have to be in a critical component of any system.
If its in a secondary or tertiary system in a critical path trigging that could disrupt or disable the primary use.In the IT industry if I want to take down a website why bother with attacking the primary machine if the low level infrastructure is vulnerable; such as chillers, aircon, EPS which often have some sort of control &amp; monitoring I could tap into if I found the right access point.If anything an attacker could cause a 3 mile island type scenario of disrupting telemetry to force a reaction of the primary system by an operator with an attack upon a low level system.Sending the right radiation signal to the kill switch of the aircon unit on a radar station in the middle of the Med could naturally overheat the signal processing equipment thereby disabling it.Now with RF-ID chips possibly disguised into a complex circuit you just can't have to look at the code you have to examine every part and chip die.Not only that I wonder if the .mil spooks have already figured out which chips and circuits by their design can be overloaded with targeted radiation to shut them down.
Really they are not "designed" kill switches but have found to be weak points in the shielding and are vulnerable to external attack causing the primary system to fail as a side affect.This is Tom Clancy &amp; James Bond stuff.Would be cooler if Israel sent jets to  the edge of the boarder and when Syrian launched they would send Syrian missiles back into Syria by faking out Syria's own guidance and radar then just fly back home untouched -- The press release would read "oops we just got lost and your stuff got blown up by your own guys -- too bad.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896107</id>
	<title>Oddly</title>
	<author>njfuzzy</author>
	<datestamp>1256739900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oddly, I'm not sure I have a problem with this. It seems obvious that you shouldn't buy military resources from the allies of your enemies. If you can't make bigger friends, don't get in the fight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oddly , I 'm not sure I have a problem with this .
It seems obvious that you should n't buy military resources from the allies of your enemies .
If you ca n't make bigger friends , do n't get in the fight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oddly, I'm not sure I have a problem with this.
It seems obvious that you shouldn't buy military resources from the allies of your enemies.
If you can't make bigger friends, don't get in the fight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899305</id>
	<title>Re:What about a Trojan "Launch" Switch</title>
	<author>Xenoflargactian</author>
	<datestamp>1256753220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's very easy to disable a system by, for example, shutting down all the network switches.  Actually initiating a launch would require intimate knowledge of the system and pervasive control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's very easy to disable a system by , for example , shutting down all the network switches .
Actually initiating a launch would require intimate knowledge of the system and pervasive control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's very easy to disable a system by, for example, shutting down all the network switches.
Actually initiating a launch would require intimate knowledge of the system and pervasive control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897481</id>
	<title>The whole article is rubbish</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256745420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone obviously doesn't understand how electronics work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>In any case, its quite likely that the attack never happened:</p><p><a href="http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera\_sherwood\_080203\_doubt\_claims\_israel\_.htm" title="opednews.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera\_sherwood\_080203\_doubt\_claims\_israel\_.htm</a> [opednews.com]</p><p>It was all a cover to probe the radar systems -- which did work and the interceptors arrived on time. Its also likely that Israel used Iraqi air space.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone obviously does n't understand how electronics work : ) In any case , its quite likely that the attack never happened : http : //www.opednews.com/articles/genera \ _sherwood \ _080203 \ _doubt \ _claims \ _israel \ _.htm [ opednews.com ] It was all a cover to probe the radar systems -- which did work and the interceptors arrived on time .
Its also likely that Israel used Iraqi air space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone obviously doesn't understand how electronics work :)In any case, its quite likely that the attack never happened:http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera\_sherwood\_080203\_doubt\_claims\_israel\_.htm [opednews.com]It was all a cover to probe the radar systems -- which did work and the interceptors arrived on time.
Its also likely that Israel used Iraqi air space.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896409</id>
	<title>The answer is clear: McAfee</title>
	<author>seniorcoder</author>
	<datestamp>1256741280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps they should run McAfee to prevent this trojan?  Then again, perhaps they don't want their defense systems to run slower than a snail that has taken an elephant tranquilizer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps they should run McAfee to prevent this trojan ?
Then again , perhaps they do n't want their defense systems to run slower than a snail that has taken an elephant tranquilizer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps they should run McAfee to prevent this trojan?
Then again, perhaps they don't want their defense systems to run slower than a snail that has taken an elephant tranquilizer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29901793</id>
	<title>Something like this in The International?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256763540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm, wasn't there something like this in film, The International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_International\_\%28film\%29)</p><p>Or at least something along those lines...well, it was a bank, selling what it knew to be useless counter-measures to Istabul, I think (?). Or at least measures which they had counter-counter measures for.</p><p>Cheers,<br>Victor</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , was n't there something like this in film , The International ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The \ _International \ _ \ % 28film \ % 29 ) Or at least something along those lines...well , it was a bank , selling what it knew to be useless counter-measures to Istabul , I think ( ? ) .
Or at least measures which they had counter-counter measures for.Cheers,Victor</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, wasn't there something like this in film, The International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_International\_\%28film\%29)Or at least something along those lines...well, it was a bank, selling what it knew to be useless counter-measures to Istabul, I think (?).
Or at least measures which they had counter-counter measures for.Cheers,Victor</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896133</id>
	<title>Unit 8200</title>
	<author>MRe\_nl</author>
	<datestamp>1256740080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://extrados.mforos.com/620462/4505345-israel-unit-8200/" title="mforos.com">http://extrados.mforos.com/620462/4505345-israel-unit-8200/</a> [mforos.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //extrados.mforos.com/620462/4505345-israel-unit-8200/ [ mforos.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://extrados.mforos.com/620462/4505345-israel-unit-8200/ [mforos.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897185</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself.</p></div></blockquote><p>Anyone who thinks that's the lesson, will be back in school later.  The real lesson is that you don't ever use anything unaudited, for anything important.  And that's not just a <em>military</em> lesson.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries , do it yourself.Anyone who thinks that 's the lesson , will be back in school later .
The real lesson is that you do n't ever use anything unaudited , for anything important .
And that 's not just a military lesson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself.Anyone who thinks that's the lesson, will be back in school later.
The real lesson is that you don't ever use anything unaudited, for anything important.
And that's not just a military lesson.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895669</id>
	<title>Open Source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256737620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its a good thing the DoD is taking a stronger, more positive stance towards open source software. I guess the next logical step would be open source hardware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a good thing the DoD is taking a stronger , more positive stance towards open source software .
I guess the next logical step would be open source hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a good thing the DoD is taking a stronger, more positive stance towards open source software.
I guess the next logical step would be open source hardware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765</id>
	<title>Outsourcing</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1256738220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You get what you deserve when you outsource...<br> <br>
Seriously, I understand the cost benefits of going with the lowest quote and all but sometimes it's best to keep things "in house" to ensure quality and accountability. And that applies to companies all the way up to governments. In this case, when dealing with national defense, it especially applies to governments...</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You get what you deserve when you outsource.. . Seriously , I understand the cost benefits of going with the lowest quote and all but sometimes it 's best to keep things " in house " to ensure quality and accountability .
And that applies to companies all the way up to governments .
In this case , when dealing with national defense , it especially applies to governments.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You get what you deserve when you outsource... 
Seriously, I understand the cost benefits of going with the lowest quote and all but sometimes it's best to keep things "in house" to ensure quality and accountability.
And that applies to companies all the way up to governments.
In this case, when dealing with national defense, it especially applies to governments...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898073</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>daem0n1x</author>
	<datestamp>1256747700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you wouldn't like to meet the French Resistance. The Nazis didn't.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you would n't like to meet the French Resistance .
The Nazis did n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you wouldn't like to meet the French Resistance.
The Nazis didn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900037</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>wall0159</author>
	<datestamp>1256755920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"that would certainly stimulate the US economy"</p><p>How would that square with the various free-trade agreements the US has been pushing in recent decades?<br>(geniune question)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" that would certainly stimulate the US economy " How would that square with the various free-trade agreements the US has been pushing in recent decades ?
( geniune question )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"that would certainly stimulate the US economy"How would that square with the various free-trade agreements the US has been pushing in recent decades?
(geniune question)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899351</id>
	<title>Re:Standard operating procedure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256753400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that there is no evidence that any explosion took place. The whole story is based on the book of a former Reagan administration official. Go ahead and check newspaper archives at at that time, and you will find no mention of any explosion. I suppose you could claim it was covered up by the Soviets, but if it was truly a "massive" explosion, I doubt they could have achieved a complete media blackout.</p><p>In addition, the entire story is described as a hoax here:</p><p>http://www.bookscape.co.uk/short\_stories/computer\_hoaxes.php</p><p>I think it's fair to say The Great Trans-Siberian Pipeline Computer Sabotage of 1982 is dubious at best.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that there is no evidence that any explosion took place .
The whole story is based on the book of a former Reagan administration official .
Go ahead and check newspaper archives at at that time , and you will find no mention of any explosion .
I suppose you could claim it was covered up by the Soviets , but if it was truly a " massive " explosion , I doubt they could have achieved a complete media blackout.In addition , the entire story is described as a hoax here : http : //www.bookscape.co.uk/short \ _stories/computer \ _hoaxes.phpI think it 's fair to say The Great Trans-Siberian Pipeline Computer Sabotage of 1982 is dubious at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that there is no evidence that any explosion took place.
The whole story is based on the book of a former Reagan administration official.
Go ahead and check newspaper archives at at that time, and you will find no mention of any explosion.
I suppose you could claim it was covered up by the Soviets, but if it was truly a "massive" explosion, I doubt they could have achieved a complete media blackout.In addition, the entire story is described as a hoax here:http://www.bookscape.co.uk/short\_stories/computer\_hoaxes.phpI think it's fair to say The Great Trans-Siberian Pipeline Computer Sabotage of 1982 is dubious at best.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057</id>
	<title>Standard operating procedure</title>
	<author>spikesahead</author>
	<datestamp>1256739660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the cold war the united states did this several times to the USSR, one notable example was a gas pipeline explosion caused by a specifically sabotaged piece of software.</p><p>Here is an article detailing the event;<br><a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39147917,00.htm" title="zdnet.co.uk">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39147917,00.htm</a> [zdnet.co.uk]</p><p>The USSR attempted in several instances to steal or otherwise acquire technology from the united states, and whenever this was detected our counter-intelligence services would provide flawed or otherwise sabotaged technology in place of the actual information sought.  This had the desired cascading effect of the USSR unable to trust any technology that may have been introduced from non-USSR sources and was considered an extremely significant part of the eventual collapse of the USSR.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the cold war the united states did this several times to the USSR , one notable example was a gas pipeline explosion caused by a specifically sabotaged piece of software.Here is an article detailing the event ; http : //news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39147917,00.htm [ zdnet.co.uk ] The USSR attempted in several instances to steal or otherwise acquire technology from the united states , and whenever this was detected our counter-intelligence services would provide flawed or otherwise sabotaged technology in place of the actual information sought .
This had the desired cascading effect of the USSR unable to trust any technology that may have been introduced from non-USSR sources and was considered an extremely significant part of the eventual collapse of the USSR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the cold war the united states did this several times to the USSR, one notable example was a gas pipeline explosion caused by a specifically sabotaged piece of software.Here is an article detailing the event;http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39147917,00.htm [zdnet.co.uk]The USSR attempted in several instances to steal or otherwise acquire technology from the united states, and whenever this was detected our counter-intelligence services would provide flawed or otherwise sabotaged technology in place of the actual information sought.
This had the desired cascading effect of the USSR unable to trust any technology that may have been introduced from non-USSR sources and was considered an extremely significant part of the eventual collapse of the USSR.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895993</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>tokul</author>
	<datestamp>1256739360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Technically Siria is not in Europe, but in Middle East. Europeans don't have 100\% dependency on American stuff. They have Eurofighter, Airbus, Heckler &amp; Koch, locally build tanks, self propelled howizers and AFVs</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software .
Technically Siria is not in Europe , but in Middle East .
Europeans do n't have 100 \ % dependency on American stuff .
They have Eurofighter , Airbus , Heckler &amp; Koch , locally build tanks , self propelled howizers and AFVs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.
Technically Siria is not in Europe, but in Middle East.
Europeans don't have 100\% dependency on American stuff.
They have Eurofighter, Airbus, Heckler &amp; Koch, locally build tanks, self propelled howizers and AFVs
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896093</id>
	<title>What about a Trojan "Launch" Switch</title>
	<author>cpu\_fusion</author>
	<datestamp>1256739780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Turning off your enemies defenses is one thing, but what about when stuff like this is used to make the enemy seem to be on the offensive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Turning off your enemies defenses is one thing , but what about when stuff like this is used to make the enemy seem to be on the offensive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Turning off your enemies defenses is one thing, but what about when stuff like this is used to make the enemy seem to be on the offensive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897963</id>
	<title>Re:Standard operating procedure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256747280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>...was considered an extremely significant part of the eventual collapse of the USSR.</i></p><p>Oh, come on. Was considered by whom, exactly ?</p><p>I might point out that both sides stole constantly from each other, in many cases quite successfully (viz, the first Soviet fission bomb), as well as energetically developing their own technology (viz, the first Soviet fusion bomb with the "layer cake" design), and that the USSR did not implode because of external pressure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...was considered an extremely significant part of the eventual collapse of the USSR.Oh , come on .
Was considered by whom , exactly ? I might point out that both sides stole constantly from each other , in many cases quite successfully ( viz , the first Soviet fission bomb ) , as well as energetically developing their own technology ( viz , the first Soviet fusion bomb with the " layer cake " design ) , and that the USSR did not implode because of external pressure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...was considered an extremely significant part of the eventual collapse of the USSR.Oh, come on.
Was considered by whom, exactly ?I might point out that both sides stole constantly from each other, in many cases quite successfully (viz, the first Soviet fission bomb), as well as energetically developing their own technology (viz, the first Soviet fusion bomb with the "layer cake" design), and that the USSR did not implode because of external pressure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29905751</id>
	<title>Re:Syrians have U.S. military hardware ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Basically, Syria bought some lemons from Russia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Basically , Syria bought some lemons from Russia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Basically, Syria bought some lemons from Russia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900995</id>
	<title>Re:Idiots</title>
	<author>CompMD</author>
	<datestamp>1256759820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Air traffic control radars receive encoded data from aircraft via transponder.  If I squawk 1200 on my transponder, then I show up as an airplane flying VFR on ATC's radar.  However, if I squawk 7700 (general emergency) and IDENT, the ATC radar will light up like a christmas tree and say "holy crap, this airplane is in trouble!"  This is all done through radar.  Someone could certainly build a trojan into a radar system that would screw it up when it receives a certain encoded message.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Air traffic control radars receive encoded data from aircraft via transponder .
If I squawk 1200 on my transponder , then I show up as an airplane flying VFR on ATC 's radar .
However , if I squawk 7700 ( general emergency ) and IDENT , the ATC radar will light up like a christmas tree and say " holy crap , this airplane is in trouble !
" This is all done through radar .
Someone could certainly build a trojan into a radar system that would screw it up when it receives a certain encoded message .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Air traffic control radars receive encoded data from aircraft via transponder.
If I squawk 1200 on my transponder, then I show up as an airplane flying VFR on ATC's radar.
However, if I squawk 7700 (general emergency) and IDENT, the ATC radar will light up like a christmas tree and say "holy crap, this airplane is in trouble!
"  This is all done through radar.
Someone could certainly build a trojan into a radar system that would screw it up when it receives a certain encoded message.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896305</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1256740800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Why? Is America planning to invade France?"</p><p>Of course not.  There are no "plans" to invade France - we just show up with guns and the French Army surrenders.  Although they we might have to tap them on the shoulder to get their attention - they've always previously surrendered while facing west.</p><p>And for those who would draw a negative example with Iraq, I'd point out that the likelihood of developing suicide bombers from the native French population is, well, nil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Why ?
Is America planning to invade France ?
" Of course not .
There are no " plans " to invade France - we just show up with guns and the French Army surrenders .
Although they we might have to tap them on the shoulder to get their attention - they 've always previously surrendered while facing west.And for those who would draw a negative example with Iraq , I 'd point out that the likelihood of developing suicide bombers from the native French population is , well , nil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Why?
Is America planning to invade France?
"Of course not.
There are no "plans" to invade France - we just show up with guns and the French Army surrenders.
Although they we might have to tap them on the shoulder to get their attention - they've always previously surrendered while facing west.And for those who would draw a negative example with Iraq, I'd point out that the likelihood of developing suicide bombers from the native French population is, well, nil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897667</id>
	<title>Re:Semiconductor Executive Should Be Investigated</title>
	<author>Maximum Prophet</author>
	<datestamp>1256746200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, an investigation/trial might reveal more secrets than the good it would do.
<br> <br>
The first rule when you see classified information splash across the front page of the New York Times, it to keep your mouth shut.  Running around, arresting people, only confirms that the information is true.
You start a secret investigation and covertly limit the information that the people suspected of the leaks have access to.  Then, when the brouhaha dies down, use special rendition to disappear the perp in the middle of the night.
<br> <br>
Usually when someone's clearance is revoked publicly, it's because they broke a rule, not because real secrets were reveled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , an investigation/trial might reveal more secrets than the good it would do .
The first rule when you see classified information splash across the front page of the New York Times , it to keep your mouth shut .
Running around , arresting people , only confirms that the information is true .
You start a secret investigation and covertly limit the information that the people suspected of the leaks have access to .
Then , when the brouhaha dies down , use special rendition to disappear the perp in the middle of the night .
Usually when someone 's clearance is revoked publicly , it 's because they broke a rule , not because real secrets were reveled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, an investigation/trial might reveal more secrets than the good it would do.
The first rule when you see classified information splash across the front page of the New York Times, it to keep your mouth shut.
Running around, arresting people, only confirms that the information is true.
You start a secret investigation and covertly limit the information that the people suspected of the leaks have access to.
Then, when the brouhaha dies down, use special rendition to disappear the perp in the middle of the night.
Usually when someone's clearance is revoked publicly, it's because they broke a rule, not because real secrets were reveled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896759</id>
	<title>This isn't the first time this has happened...</title>
	<author>the saltydog</author>
	<datestamp>1256742600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4394002" title="msn.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4394002</a> [msn.com]</p><p>From the article;</p><p>"In January 1982, President Ronald Reagan approved a CIA plan to sabotage the economy of the Soviet Union through covert transfers of technology that contained hidden malfunctions, including software that later triggered a huge explosion in a Siberian natural gas pipeline, according to a new memoir by a Reagan White House official."</p><p>All in all, a fascinating article - check it out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4394002 [ msn.com ] From the article ; " In January 1982 , President Ronald Reagan approved a CIA plan to sabotage the economy of the Soviet Union through covert transfers of technology that contained hidden malfunctions , including software that later triggered a huge explosion in a Siberian natural gas pipeline , according to a new memoir by a Reagan White House official .
" All in all , a fascinating article - check it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4394002 [msn.com]From the article;"In January 1982, President Ronald Reagan approved a CIA plan to sabotage the economy of the Soviet Union through covert transfers of technology that contained hidden malfunctions, including software that later triggered a huge explosion in a Siberian natural gas pipeline, according to a new memoir by a Reagan White House official.
"All in all, a fascinating article - check it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896543</id>
	<title>Re:Semiconductor Executive Should Be Investigated</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1256741700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"So there's a semiconductor executive that is talking about classified information in an interview? His/Her clearance should be revoked, at least temporarily, until an investigation can be performed to determine whether any laws were broken, and how long the executive should serve."</p><p>Unless he was asked to "confirm" it by US intelligence as part of a cover story for the REAL reason the Isrealis were able to take out the systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" So there 's a semiconductor executive that is talking about classified information in an interview ?
His/Her clearance should be revoked , at least temporarily , until an investigation can be performed to determine whether any laws were broken , and how long the executive should serve .
" Unless he was asked to " confirm " it by US intelligence as part of a cover story for the REAL reason the Isrealis were able to take out the systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So there's a semiconductor executive that is talking about classified information in an interview?
His/Her clearance should be revoked, at least temporarily, until an investigation can be performed to determine whether any laws were broken, and how long the executive should serve.
"Unless he was asked to "confirm" it by US intelligence as part of a cover story for the REAL reason the Isrealis were able to take out the systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29902109</id>
	<title>Our "Kill Switch"</title>
	<author>nsaspook</author>
	<datestamp>1256721840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Marine dozing off in the corner of the crypto room.</p><p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/zaruka/2946414133/in/set-72157608078635808/" title="flickr.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/photos/zaruka/2946414133/in/set-72157608078635808/</a> [flickr.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Marine dozing off in the corner of the crypto room.http : //www.flickr.com/photos/zaruka/2946414133/in/set-72157608078635808/ [ flickr.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Marine dozing off in the corner of the crypto room.http://www.flickr.com/photos/zaruka/2946414133/in/set-72157608078635808/ [flickr.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29901801</id>
	<title>Re:Outsourcing</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1256763540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone care to even BEGIN to estimate how much of the electronics components used by the U.S. military are manufactured in China and other foreign countries? For that matter, is the U.S. even CAPABLE of manufacturing most electronics components anymore? I don't recall seeing a so much as a chip, much less larger component, made here since the 1980's.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone care to even BEGIN to estimate how much of the electronics components used by the U.S. military are manufactured in China and other foreign countries ?
For that matter , is the U.S. even CAPABLE of manufacturing most electronics components anymore ?
I do n't recall seeing a so much as a chip , much less larger component , made here since the 1980 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone care to even BEGIN to estimate how much of the electronics components used by the U.S. military are manufactured in China and other foreign countries?
For that matter, is the U.S. even CAPABLE of manufacturing most electronics components anymore?
I don't recall seeing a so much as a chip, much less larger component, made here since the 1980's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897123</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Richard\_at\_work</author>
	<datestamp>1256743980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself. Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.</p><p>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</p></div><p>Which European countries rely 100\% on American technology?  I offer the Tornado, Jaguar, Eurofighter, Rafale, Mirage and others as proof to the contrary.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries , do it yourself .
Especially if you ever under any way , shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software.Which European countries rely 100 \ % on American technology ?
I offer the Tornado , Jaguar , Eurofighter , Rafale , Mirage and others as proof to the contrary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself.
Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.Which European countries rely 100\% on American technology?
I offer the Tornado, Jaguar, Eurofighter, Rafale, Mirage and others as proof to the contrary.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906903</id>
	<title>Re:Semiconductor Executive Should Be Investigated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256754300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're known for doing that, then you could plausibly go and revoke clearance and people would think you'd never be *that* obvious but it would be true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're known for doing that , then you could plausibly go and revoke clearance and people would think you 'd never be * that * obvious but it would be true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're known for doing that, then you could plausibly go and revoke clearance and people would think you'd never be *that* obvious but it would be true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897049</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Nathrael</author>
	<datestamp>1256743680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</p></div><p>Because Europe would ever cross paths with the US.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software.Because Europe would ever cross paths with the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.Because Europe would ever cross paths with the US.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896055</id>
	<title>So...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unit 8200 is responsible for my Windows PC crashing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unit 8200 is responsible for my Windows PC crashing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unit 8200 is responsible for my Windows PC crashing...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899185</id>
	<title>Re:Don't buy weapons from your enemies?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256752620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually it's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100\% on your side. Best would be to build it yourself.</p></div><p>Best to build them yourself full stop, regardless of whether or not they're apparently on your side.  You'd think that with all of the co-operation they've been through the US and UK would be fairly tight but that <a href="http://www.v3.co.uk/vnunet/news/2152035/joint-strike-fighter" title="v3.co.uk" rel="nofollow">didn't stop arguments between the UK and US</a> [v3.co.uk] over exactly this kind of thing.</p><p>They might be buddies now, but you never know what will happen in the future...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it 's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100 \ % on your side .
Best would be to build it yourself.Best to build them yourself full stop , regardless of whether or not they 're apparently on your side .
You 'd think that with all of the co-operation they 've been through the US and UK would be fairly tight but that did n't stop arguments between the UK and US [ v3.co.uk ] over exactly this kind of thing.They might be buddies now , but you never know what will happen in the future.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100\% on your side.
Best would be to build it yourself.Best to build them yourself full stop, regardless of whether or not they're apparently on your side.
You'd think that with all of the co-operation they've been through the US and UK would be fairly tight but that didn't stop arguments between the UK and US [v3.co.uk] over exactly this kind of thing.They might be buddies now, but you never know what will happen in the future...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898561</id>
	<title>Re:Idiots</title>
	<author>tehdaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1256749860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In general, your objections are valid. In this case, the device with the supposed kill switch is a radar. A giant radio receiver. You would be hard pressed to find a better communication channel than that, and it is hidden in plain sight.</p><p>
Everything that is received by the radar goes through software at some point or other, and this is not trivial stuff, it is likely in ROM and not easily dumped or disassembled. Possibly encrypted to boot. A kill switch in general? Hard. For a radar? very plausible, and most of your objections have a simple answer for a radar. </p><p>T</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In general , your objections are valid .
In this case , the device with the supposed kill switch is a radar .
A giant radio receiver .
You would be hard pressed to find a better communication channel than that , and it is hidden in plain sight .
Everything that is received by the radar goes through software at some point or other , and this is not trivial stuff , it is likely in ROM and not easily dumped or disassembled .
Possibly encrypted to boot .
A kill switch in general ?
Hard. For a radar ?
very plausible , and most of your objections have a simple answer for a radar .
T</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In general, your objections are valid.
In this case, the device with the supposed kill switch is a radar.
A giant radio receiver.
You would be hard pressed to find a better communication channel than that, and it is hidden in plain sight.
Everything that is received by the radar goes through software at some point or other, and this is not trivial stuff, it is likely in ROM and not easily dumped or disassembled.
Possibly encrypted to boot.
A kill switch in general?
Hard. For a radar?
very plausible, and most of your objections have a simple answer for a radar.
T</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29904529</id>
	<title>Prefix Code 1-6-3-0-9</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1256735340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should never be <a href="http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0084726/" title="imdb.com">Reliant</a> [imdb.com] on your enemy's technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should never be Reliant [ imdb.com ] on your enemy 's technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should never be Reliant [imdb.com] on your enemy's technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29901397</id>
	<title>Weapons work both ways</title>
	<author>minstrelmike</author>
	<datestamp>1256761680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with weapons of any sort (including back doors) is that they work both ways.
We here in America will get burned by the exact same behavior.<br> <br>

Those who think we can trust only Americans to do right forget 1) about little Timmy McVeigh, Oklahoma City bomber and
2) George Washington, our revered first president, was a terrorist and revolutionary first.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with weapons of any sort ( including back doors ) is that they work both ways .
We here in America will get burned by the exact same behavior .
Those who think we can trust only Americans to do right forget 1 ) about little Timmy McVeigh , Oklahoma City bomber and 2 ) George Washington , our revered first president , was a terrorist and revolutionary first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with weapons of any sort (including back doors) is that they work both ways.
We here in America will get burned by the exact same behavior.
Those who think we can trust only Americans to do right forget 1) about little Timmy McVeigh, Oklahoma City bomber and
2) George Washington, our revered first president, was a terrorist and revolutionary first.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069</id>
	<title>The Chinese and Windows</title>
	<author>kurt555gs</author>
	<datestamp>1256739660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I understand why the Chinese don't want to use Windows in their defense systems. I am sure there are back doors to encryption, and remote access, and all kinds of sneaky things that the CIA can do to anyone using Microsoft products.</p><p>Microsoft can say , no, its fine. Without the source code, how could you trust them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand why the Chinese do n't want to use Windows in their defense systems .
I am sure there are back doors to encryption , and remote access , and all kinds of sneaky things that the CIA can do to anyone using Microsoft products.Microsoft can say , no , its fine .
Without the source code , how could you trust them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand why the Chinese don't want to use Windows in their defense systems.
I am sure there are back doors to encryption, and remote access, and all kinds of sneaky things that the CIA can do to anyone using Microsoft products.Microsoft can say , no, its fine.
Without the source code, how could you trust them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29919289</id>
	<title>Secret enhancements by contrast</title>
	<author>twosat</author>
	<datestamp>1256825160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember reading in the late 80's that many US weapon electronics actually had hidden enhanced capabilities and/or features, that in an emergency could be unlocked by some sort of code or special sequence of settings that was kept secret from its normal operators.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember reading in the late 80 's that many US weapon electronics actually had hidden enhanced capabilities and/or features , that in an emergency could be unlocked by some sort of code or special sequence of settings that was kept secret from its normal operators .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember reading in the late 80's that many US weapon electronics actually had hidden enhanced capabilities and/or features, that in an emergency could be unlocked by some sort of code or special sequence of settings that was kept secret from its normal operators.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899951</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese and Windows</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1256755680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't use WIndows in my defense systems, either. The US DOD, however, has had at times a different view.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't use WIndows in my defense systems , either .
The US DOD , however , has had at times a different view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't use WIndows in my defense systems, either.
The US DOD, however, has had at times a different view.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896127</id>
	<title>Integrated air defence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256740020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My understanding is that they took out the NETWORK and COMPUTERS connecting all the weaponry, not the weaponry. So while the guys in the missile batteries were playing cards, or whatever, the search radar was showing cartoons, and nobody ever woke the general up with an attack warning until the bombs dropped. Lieutenants do not shoot missiles unless the general says it is OK.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My understanding is that they took out the NETWORK and COMPUTERS connecting all the weaponry , not the weaponry .
So while the guys in the missile batteries were playing cards , or whatever , the search radar was showing cartoons , and nobody ever woke the general up with an attack warning until the bombs dropped .
Lieutenants do not shoot missiles unless the general says it is OK .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My understanding is that they took out the NETWORK and COMPUTERS connecting all the weaponry, not the weaponry.
So while the guys in the missile batteries were playing cards, or whatever, the search radar was showing cartoons, and nobody ever woke the general up with an attack warning until the bombs dropped.
Lieutenants do not shoot missiles unless the general says it is OK.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899887</id>
	<title>Re:F16-IN</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1256755380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every US military aircraft since the F4 sold for export has had a kill switch in them.  This is widely known within the industry and happened after the Shah was over thrown.  I'm not so sure about the Russian aircraft, but it would surprise me if the MIG-29 and SU-27's DIDN'T have hill switches.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every US military aircraft since the F4 sold for export has had a kill switch in them .
This is widely known within the industry and happened after the Shah was over thrown .
I 'm not so sure about the Russian aircraft , but it would surprise me if the MIG-29 and SU-27 's DID N'T have hill switches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every US military aircraft since the F4 sold for export has had a kill switch in them.
This is widely known within the industry and happened after the Shah was over thrown.
I'm not so sure about the Russian aircraft, but it would surprise me if the MIG-29 and SU-27's DIDN'T have hill switches.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897115</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256740260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself. Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.

I think this should be a really <b>big wakeup call to european countries</b> that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</p></div><p>Why? Is America planning to invade France?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries , do it yourself .
Especially if you ever under any way , shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country .
I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software.Why ?
Is America planning to invade France ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself.
Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.
I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.Why?
Is America planning to invade France?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899919</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>ravenshrike</author>
	<datestamp>1256755500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>H&amp;K. Because you suck, and we hate you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>H&amp;K .
Because you suck , and we hate you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>H&amp;K.
Because you suck, and we hate you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29914599</id>
	<title>We're talking about the New York Times here</title>
	<author>GPS Pilot</author>
	<datestamp>1256847240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even during the Bush administration, the New York Times regularly leaked classified information without consequence.  Don't expect infosec to be tighter now!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even during the Bush administration , the New York Times regularly leaked classified information without consequence .
Do n't expect infosec to be tighter now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even during the Bush administration, the New York Times regularly leaked classified information without consequence.
Don't expect infosec to be tighter now!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897209</id>
	<title>The rules of fight club</title>
	<author>JerryLove</author>
	<datestamp>1256744280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first rule of a successful secret trojan program is:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; You do not talk about the secret trojan program.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first rule of a successful secret trojan program is :       You do not talk about the secret trojan program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first rule of a successful secret trojan program is:
      You do not talk about the secret trojan program.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29903403</id>
	<title>"Interesting" to n00bs only</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256728380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is posted about as often as all those damn xkcd links, and is about as interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is posted about as often as all those damn xkcd links , and is about as interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is posted about as often as all those damn xkcd links, and is about as interesting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906375</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256748780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>European countries that relies 100\% on American tech, both on hardware and software.</p></div><p>Being which ones? I don't know a single one. What I know though, is that Germany, France, Italy the UK and Russia are huge in military tech export. Especially Germany. I would not be surprised, if the US actually partially bought its specialized tech here.</p><p>And the chips are made in China/Korea/Taiwan/etc anyway.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>European countries that relies 100 \ % on American tech , both on hardware and software.Being which ones ?
I do n't know a single one .
What I know though , is that Germany , France , Italy the UK and Russia are huge in military tech export .
Especially Germany .
I would not be surprised , if the US actually partially bought its specialized tech here.And the chips are made in China/Korea/Taiwan/etc anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>European countries that relies 100\% on American tech, both on hardware and software.Being which ones?
I don't know a single one.
What I know though, is that Germany, France, Italy the UK and Russia are huge in military tech export.
Especially Germany.
I would not be surprised, if the US actually partially bought its specialized tech here.And the chips are made in China/Korea/Taiwan/etc anyway.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896879</id>
	<title>Could it be ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>James Mowrey?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>James Mowrey ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>James Mowrey?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895815</id>
	<title>All of this has happened before, and ...</title>
	<author>sinator</author>
	<datestamp>1256738400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frakkin' Baltar!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frakkin ' Baltar !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frakkin' Baltar!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895749</id>
	<title>Trojan kill switch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256738100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever happened to Paris, Helen, and Hector's wife anyway? Did they get away and start a new Trojan empire somewhere else??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever happened to Paris , Helen , and Hector 's wife anyway ?
Did they get away and start a new Trojan empire somewhere else ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever happened to Paris, Helen, and Hector's wife anyway?
Did they get away and start a new Trojan empire somewhere else?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823</id>
	<title>Syrians have U.S. military hardware ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256738460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does that mean that the U.S. provided *Syria* with sensitive military hardware (ok.. with built-in kill switches) ?</p><p>If they didn't then it's not a kill switch and the U.S. simply provided their Israeli allies with electronic warfare technologies.</p><p>It was my understanding that syrian military hardware was russian based anyway..</p><p>So I'm not sure I understand the whole thing..</p><p>--Ivan</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does that mean that the U.S. provided * Syria * with sensitive military hardware ( ok.. with built-in kill switches ) ? If they did n't then it 's not a kill switch and the U.S. simply provided their Israeli allies with electronic warfare technologies.It was my understanding that syrian military hardware was russian based anyway..So I 'm not sure I understand the whole thing..--Ivan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does that mean that the U.S. provided *Syria* with sensitive military hardware (ok.. with built-in kill switches) ?If they didn't then it's not a kill switch and the U.S. simply provided their Israeli allies with electronic warfare technologies.It was my understanding that syrian military hardware was russian based anyway..So I'm not sure I understand the whole thing..--Ivan</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019</id>
	<title>Semiconductor Executive Should Be Investigated</title>
	<author>fwr</author>
	<datestamp>1256739480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So there's a semiconductor executive that is talking about classified information in an interview?  His/Her clearance should be revoked, at least temporarily, until an investigation can be performed to determine whether any laws were broken, and how long the executive should serve.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So there 's a semiconductor executive that is talking about classified information in an interview ?
His/Her clearance should be revoked , at least temporarily , until an investigation can be performed to determine whether any laws were broken , and how long the executive should serve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So there's a semiconductor executive that is talking about classified information in an interview?
His/Her clearance should be revoked, at least temporarily, until an investigation can be performed to determine whether any laws were broken, and how long the executive should serve.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898353</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese and Windows</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1256748960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft will, and has, provided source code to governments when asked.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft will , and has , provided source code to governments when asked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft will, and has, provided source code to governments when asked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898159</id>
	<title>Re:Outsourcing</title>
	<author>gad\_zuki!</author>
	<datestamp>1256748060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where do you expect countries run by dictators (Syria has been under martial law since 1963 and more or less a client state for Iran) that have shit for university, shit for engineering, and oppression as the norm to get advanced anti-missile systems?  They cant design their own. They would be starting with 1950s tech at best.</p><p>They knew they were taking a chance with foreign made equipment, but, they really dont have a choice.</p><p>Also, its worth noting that there may not have been an intentional backdoor/killswitch, this could have been a hack known to the US and others but not to Syria:</p><p><a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/10/how-israel-spoo/" title="wired.com">http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/10/how-israel-spoo/</a> [wired.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where do you expect countries run by dictators ( Syria has been under martial law since 1963 and more or less a client state for Iran ) that have shit for university , shit for engineering , and oppression as the norm to get advanced anti-missile systems ?
They cant design their own .
They would be starting with 1950s tech at best.They knew they were taking a chance with foreign made equipment , but , they really dont have a choice.Also , its worth noting that there may not have been an intentional backdoor/killswitch , this could have been a hack known to the US and others but not to Syria : http : //www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/10/how-israel-spoo/ [ wired.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where do you expect countries run by dictators (Syria has been under martial law since 1963 and more or less a client state for Iran) that have shit for university, shit for engineering, and oppression as the norm to get advanced anti-missile systems?
They cant design their own.
They would be starting with 1950s tech at best.They knew they were taking a chance with foreign made equipment, but, they really dont have a choice.Also, its worth noting that there may not have been an intentional backdoor/killswitch, this could have been a hack known to the US and others but not to Syria:http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/10/how-israel-spoo/ [wired.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896457</id>
	<title>Kill switches and more</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256741400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are secret kill switches without a doubt.  In some cases they are very sophisticated, like signal processing checks that look for frequency signatures that act as passkeys to enable backdoor commands.  Also, there are specialized modules in commercial products that allow easy tracking of the devices that can be used for missile targeting.  Come on, you had to suspect this...  It is true and has led to kill/capture of several high value targets.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are secret kill switches without a doubt .
In some cases they are very sophisticated , like signal processing checks that look for frequency signatures that act as passkeys to enable backdoor commands .
Also , there are specialized modules in commercial products that allow easy tracking of the devices that can be used for missile targeting .
Come on , you had to suspect this... It is true and has led to kill/capture of several high value targets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are secret kill switches without a doubt.
In some cases they are very sophisticated, like signal processing checks that look for frequency signatures that act as passkeys to enable backdoor commands.
Also, there are specialized modules in commercial products that allow easy tracking of the devices that can be used for missile targeting.
Come on, you had to suspect this...  It is true and has led to kill/capture of several high value targets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900767</id>
	<title>Re:Syrians have U.S. military hardware ?</title>
	<author>Reziac</author>
	<datestamp>1256758860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This way you get to sell equipment to BOTH sides, preventing your enemies from buying from other sources (make yours cheaper, they'll buy it) AND giving your allies an edge they can count on.</p><p>Makes perfect sense to me...</p><p>Oh yeah - PROFIT!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This way you get to sell equipment to BOTH sides , preventing your enemies from buying from other sources ( make yours cheaper , they 'll buy it ) AND giving your allies an edge they can count on.Makes perfect sense to me...Oh yeah - PROFIT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This way you get to sell equipment to BOTH sides, preventing your enemies from buying from other sources (make yours cheaper, they'll buy it) AND giving your allies an edge they can count on.Makes perfect sense to me...Oh yeah - PROFIT!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896845</id>
	<title>Re:Don't buy weapons from your enemies?</title>
	<author>JohnFen</author>
	<datestamp>1256742960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually it's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100\% on your side.</p></div><p>True. Also, history teaches us that today's 100\% ally can easily become tomorrow's 100\% enemy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it 's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100 \ % on your side.True .
Also , history teaches us that today 's 100 \ % ally can easily become tomorrow 's 100 \ % enemy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it's a bad idea to buy it from anyone that is not 100\% on your side.True.
Also, history teaches us that today's 100\% ally can easily become tomorrow's 100\% enemy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895945</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>OzPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1256739180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself. Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.</p></div><p>And in TFA they say that only 20\% of chips are manufactured in the US - so that makes it kinda hard not to buy goods from foreign countries.</p><p>However what you are suggesting is that 100\% of goods used by the US military should be made in the US - and that might be a good reason in itself as that would certainly stimulate the US economy</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries , do it yourself .
Especially if you ever under any way , shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.And in TFA they say that only 20 \ % of chips are manufactured in the US - so that makes it kinda hard not to buy goods from foreign countries.However what you are suggesting is that 100 \ % of goods used by the US military should be made in the US - and that might be a good reason in itself as that would certainly stimulate the US economy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont buy important technology from foreign countries, do it yourself.
Especially if you ever under any way, shape or form could cross paths with said foreign country.And in TFA they say that only 20\% of chips are manufactured in the US - so that makes it kinda hard not to buy goods from foreign countries.However what you are suggesting is that 100\% of goods used by the US military should be made in the US - and that might be a good reason in itself as that would certainly stimulate the US economy
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898723</id>
	<title>Re:Standard operating procedure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256750700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry to spoil the fun but as a matter of fact it is fairly evident (and not very surprising, given the circumstances) that the West lost the whole Cold War spy game at large. There were moles at top positions in all major US agencies and you can safely assume that the Russians were well-informed about any of those little 'dirty tricks' you are referring to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry to spoil the fun but as a matter of fact it is fairly evident ( and not very surprising , given the circumstances ) that the West lost the whole Cold War spy game at large .
There were moles at top positions in all major US agencies and you can safely assume that the Russians were well-informed about any of those little 'dirty tricks ' you are referring to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry to spoil the fun but as a matter of fact it is fairly evident (and not very surprising, given the circumstances) that the West lost the whole Cold War spy game at large.
There were moles at top positions in all major US agencies and you can safely assume that the Russians were well-informed about any of those little 'dirty tricks' you are referring to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896045</id>
	<title>I call BS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a feeling they just didn't shoot due to some command&amp;control screwup and there is no killswitch..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a feeling they just did n't shoot due to some command&amp;control screwup and there is no killswitch. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a feeling they just didn't shoot due to some command&amp;control screwup and there is no killswitch..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896807</id>
	<title>uhh...Russian technology</title>
	<author>Nidi62</author>
	<datestamp>1256742840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do Israelis manage to build in kill switches on technology developed in Russia and provided to Syria through Iran?  That would involve some deep penetration, which I doubt even the Israelis can do.  The Russian did pretty much invent counterespionage, after all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do Israelis manage to build in kill switches on technology developed in Russia and provided to Syria through Iran ?
That would involve some deep penetration , which I doubt even the Israelis can do .
The Russian did pretty much invent counterespionage , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do Israelis manage to build in kill switches on technology developed in Russia and provided to Syria through Iran?
That would involve some deep penetration, which I doubt even the Israelis can do.
The Russian did pretty much invent counterespionage, after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895967</id>
	<title>Re:Syrians have U.S. military hardware ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe some of the US hardware from Iran during the Shah era has flowed to Syria? That's the thing with military hardware, once you sell it to somebody, there's very little you can do to keep them from passing it to somebody else. In that context, kill switches are genius (assuming the 'enemy' doesn't hack your Gibson).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe some of the US hardware from Iran during the Shah era has flowed to Syria ?
That 's the thing with military hardware , once you sell it to somebody , there 's very little you can do to keep them from passing it to somebody else .
In that context , kill switches are genius ( assuming the 'enemy ' does n't hack your Gibson ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe some of the US hardware from Iran during the Shah era has flowed to Syria?
That's the thing with military hardware, once you sell it to somebody, there's very little you can do to keep them from passing it to somebody else.
In that context, kill switches are genius (assuming the 'enemy' doesn't hack your Gibson).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899361</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256753460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plus one of the reasons the Europeans use American hardware is so that we can more easily integrate forces if we ever end up in a big war.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus one of the reasons the Europeans use American hardware is so that we can more easily integrate forces if we ever end up in a big war .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus one of the reasons the Europeans use American hardware is so that we can more easily integrate forces if we ever end up in a big war.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896751</id>
	<title>Idiots</title>
	<author>fineghal</author>
	<datestamp>1256742600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know what's absolutely hilarious about this? A kill switch requires a COMMAND to activate.
OP probably believes in one world order and a secret cabal of jewish-mason-opus-dei members.

1) Activation requires communication with the kill switch. - A fair portion (missiles spring to mind) of military hardware is shielded from this kind of thing. Can't have a stray emp field junking your hardware in a combat zone can you?
2) Activation requires communication. Stop and think about that. This isn't some craptacular residential cable modem that's connected to the internet 24/7. You're trying to tell me that "they" can magically get line level access to the hardware?
- Just like in regular computer security - if "they" have physical access to the machine, you're already screwed.
3) Activation requires communication. Let us suppose that there IS magical over-the-air access possible to some random device. Every single method EVER requires some type of input at the least. Do you really think that NO ONE is going to notice a radio or IR reciever being added to a chip or hardware?
4) Do you really, truly believe that this hardware is preconfigured from the manufacturer for the military? People Telco's (in the us at least) don't even do that! You're trying to tell me that any firm (military or otherwise) is going to tell their manufacturer "Hey, while you're at it, I want you to add this access code algorithm."
5) And finally: Obviously the military/anyone is NEVER going to compare their original designs with what was delivered from manufacturer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what 's absolutely hilarious about this ?
A kill switch requires a COMMAND to activate .
OP probably believes in one world order and a secret cabal of jewish-mason-opus-dei members .
1 ) Activation requires communication with the kill switch .
- A fair portion ( missiles spring to mind ) of military hardware is shielded from this kind of thing .
Ca n't have a stray emp field junking your hardware in a combat zone can you ?
2 ) Activation requires communication .
Stop and think about that .
This is n't some craptacular residential cable modem that 's connected to the internet 24/7 .
You 're trying to tell me that " they " can magically get line level access to the hardware ?
- Just like in regular computer security - if " they " have physical access to the machine , you 're already screwed .
3 ) Activation requires communication .
Let us suppose that there IS magical over-the-air access possible to some random device .
Every single method EVER requires some type of input at the least .
Do you really think that NO ONE is going to notice a radio or IR reciever being added to a chip or hardware ?
4 ) Do you really , truly believe that this hardware is preconfigured from the manufacturer for the military ?
People Telco 's ( in the us at least ) do n't even do that !
You 're trying to tell me that any firm ( military or otherwise ) is going to tell their manufacturer " Hey , while you 're at it , I want you to add this access code algorithm .
" 5 ) And finally : Obviously the military/anyone is NEVER going to compare their original designs with what was delivered from manufacturer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what's absolutely hilarious about this?
A kill switch requires a COMMAND to activate.
OP probably believes in one world order and a secret cabal of jewish-mason-opus-dei members.
1) Activation requires communication with the kill switch.
- A fair portion (missiles spring to mind) of military hardware is shielded from this kind of thing.
Can't have a stray emp field junking your hardware in a combat zone can you?
2) Activation requires communication.
Stop and think about that.
This isn't some craptacular residential cable modem that's connected to the internet 24/7.
You're trying to tell me that "they" can magically get line level access to the hardware?
- Just like in regular computer security - if "they" have physical access to the machine, you're already screwed.
3) Activation requires communication.
Let us suppose that there IS magical over-the-air access possible to some random device.
Every single method EVER requires some type of input at the least.
Do you really think that NO ONE is going to notice a radio or IR reciever being added to a chip or hardware?
4) Do you really, truly believe that this hardware is preconfigured from the manufacturer for the military?
People Telco's (in the us at least) don't even do that!
You're trying to tell me that any firm (military or otherwise) is going to tell their manufacturer "Hey, while you're at it, I want you to add this access code algorithm.
"
5) And finally: Obviously the military/anyone is NEVER going to compare their original designs with what was delivered from manufacturer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896125</id>
	<title>American military equipment in Syria?</title>
	<author>tokul</author>
	<datestamp>1256740020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they confused Jordan with Syria. Syrian military is based on Eastern technology. I don't think that SA-2 and SA-3, SA-8 use US radars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they confused Jordan with Syria .
Syrian military is based on Eastern technology .
I do n't think that SA-2 and SA-3 , SA-8 use US radars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they confused Jordan with Syria.
Syrian military is based on Eastern technology.
I don't think that SA-2 and SA-3, SA-8 use US radars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897329</id>
	<title>Domestic or foreign made, it doesn't matter</title>
	<author>cyberfringe</author>
	<datestamp>1256744820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Chips, devices, components, subassemblies and so forth can all be compromised at any time in the manufacturing life cycle.  It doesn't really matter whether some portion of the manufacturing is done domestically or elsewhere.  The risk is mostly about people and access to data and the manufacturing process, and people are clearly vulnerable.  Furthermore, each stage of the manufacturing process has enough engineering to worry about without having to verify and validate all the previous steps. Sure, major portions of the manufacture of critical military systems is done under heavy security, but not all of it!  I submit that although having a completely trusted system is a worthwhile goal, there is a rapidly diminishing return on investment in trying to achieve it.  You just won't get 100\% trust without some real breakthroughs in how systems are currently built. Therefore you will have vulnerable if not already-compromised systems.  I think the important practical question is how to continue to operate effectively without trusted systems, when you know there is a risk your systems will not work, work incorrectly or even work against you.  When it starts to do so. That's the challenge.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chips , devices , components , subassemblies and so forth can all be compromised at any time in the manufacturing life cycle .
It does n't really matter whether some portion of the manufacturing is done domestically or elsewhere .
The risk is mostly about people and access to data and the manufacturing process , and people are clearly vulnerable .
Furthermore , each stage of the manufacturing process has enough engineering to worry about without having to verify and validate all the previous steps .
Sure , major portions of the manufacture of critical military systems is done under heavy security , but not all of it !
I submit that although having a completely trusted system is a worthwhile goal , there is a rapidly diminishing return on investment in trying to achieve it .
You just wo n't get 100 \ % trust without some real breakthroughs in how systems are currently built .
Therefore you will have vulnerable if not already-compromised systems .
I think the important practical question is how to continue to operate effectively without trusted systems , when you know there is a risk your systems will not work , work incorrectly or even work against you .
When it starts to do so .
That 's the challenge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chips, devices, components, subassemblies and so forth can all be compromised at any time in the manufacturing life cycle.
It doesn't really matter whether some portion of the manufacturing is done domestically or elsewhere.
The risk is mostly about people and access to data and the manufacturing process, and people are clearly vulnerable.
Furthermore, each stage of the manufacturing process has enough engineering to worry about without having to verify and validate all the previous steps.
Sure, major portions of the manufacture of critical military systems is done under heavy security, but not all of it!
I submit that although having a completely trusted system is a worthwhile goal, there is a rapidly diminishing return on investment in trying to achieve it.
You just won't get 100\% trust without some real breakthroughs in how systems are currently built.
Therefore you will have vulnerable if not already-compromised systems.
I think the important practical question is how to continue to operate effectively without trusted systems, when you know there is a risk your systems will not work, work incorrectly or even work against you.
When it starts to do so.
That's the challenge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906727</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256752080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well... not again any time soon, no.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well... not again any time soon , no .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well... not again any time soon, no.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896719</id>
	<title>Y'know...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1256742420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If <i>I</i> were to have an "electronic intelligence agency" I would call it "Unit 2600".</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were to have an " electronic intelligence agency " I would call it " Unit 2600 " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I were to have an "electronic intelligence agency" I would call it "Unit 2600".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896175</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256740320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately DIY doesn't work so well when you need advanced aircraft and ships that can launch them.  It probably takes tens of thousands of engineers to design and manufacture an F-22, most countries don't have that many, so how can they DIY?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately DIY does n't work so well when you need advanced aircraft and ships that can launch them .
It probably takes tens of thousands of engineers to design and manufacture an F-22 , most countries do n't have that many , so how can they DIY ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately DIY doesn't work so well when you need advanced aircraft and ships that can launch them.
It probably takes tens of thousands of engineers to design and manufacture an F-22, most countries don't have that many, so how can they DIY?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899907</id>
	<title>Buridan's Ass</title>
	<author>DrVomact</author>
	<datestamp>1256755440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This reminds me of a story I heard about a computer failure that occurred during the Falklands war. This was apparently a bug, and not sabotage...but who knows? According to the story (confession: I've not verified this, but it's such a good story that it just <em>has</em> to be true), the Brits noticed that sometimes their computer-controlled naval antiaircraft guns weren't firing&mdash;there were targets&mdash;i.e., Argentine planes firing at <em>them</em>, but the guns just froze up. The cause was later determined to be a flaw in the targeting algorithm. The algorithm was supposed to pick the optimal target by weighing criteria such as distance, vector, speed, etc. of the enemy planes. However, there was no code for making a decision if two targets were calculated to have <em>equal</em> priority. The gun just couldn't make up its mind. Sort of a real-life implementation of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buridan's\_ass" title="wikipedia.org">Buridan's Ass</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This reminds me of a story I heard about a computer failure that occurred during the Falklands war .
This was apparently a bug , and not sabotage...but who knows ?
According to the story ( confession : I 've not verified this , but it 's such a good story that it just has to be true ) , the Brits noticed that sometimes their computer-controlled naval antiaircraft guns were n't firing    there were targets    i.e. , Argentine planes firing at them , but the guns just froze up .
The cause was later determined to be a flaw in the targeting algorithm .
The algorithm was supposed to pick the optimal target by weighing criteria such as distance , vector , speed , etc .
of the enemy planes .
However , there was no code for making a decision if two targets were calculated to have equal priority .
The gun just could n't make up its mind .
Sort of a real-life implementation of Buridan 's Ass [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This reminds me of a story I heard about a computer failure that occurred during the Falklands war.
This was apparently a bug, and not sabotage...but who knows?
According to the story (confession: I've not verified this, but it's such a good story that it just has to be true), the Brits noticed that sometimes their computer-controlled naval antiaircraft guns weren't firing—there were targets—i.e., Argentine planes firing at them, but the guns just froze up.
The cause was later determined to be a flaw in the targeting algorithm.
The algorithm was supposed to pick the optimal target by weighing criteria such as distance, vector, speed, etc.
of the enemy planes.
However, there was no code for making a decision if two targets were calculated to have equal priority.
The gun just couldn't make up its mind.
Sort of a real-life implementation of Buridan's Ass [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895747</id>
	<title>Re:Open Source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256738040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just in case you are not aiming to a funny mod, Open Source (Software and Hardware) as good as it is, is probably not the end-all solution to this problem.</p><p>It takes HUGE amounts of resources (including time) and knowledge to do a full security audit that almost guarantees it's safe and killswitch free.</p><p>And sometimes it can be damn near impossible to figure out whether or not it really IS clean, since all it takes is a few subtle differences in behaviour to open up the door to attackers, which can go unnoticed to most people who aren't looking for them in particular.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just in case you are not aiming to a funny mod , Open Source ( Software and Hardware ) as good as it is , is probably not the end-all solution to this problem.It takes HUGE amounts of resources ( including time ) and knowledge to do a full security audit that almost guarantees it 's safe and killswitch free.And sometimes it can be damn near impossible to figure out whether or not it really IS clean , since all it takes is a few subtle differences in behaviour to open up the door to attackers , which can go unnoticed to most people who are n't looking for them in particular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just in case you are not aiming to a funny mod, Open Source (Software and Hardware) as good as it is, is probably not the end-all solution to this problem.It takes HUGE amounts of resources (including time) and knowledge to do a full security audit that almost guarantees it's safe and killswitch free.And sometimes it can be damn near impossible to figure out whether or not it really IS clean, since all it takes is a few subtle differences in behaviour to open up the door to attackers, which can go unnoticed to most people who aren't looking for them in particular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899539</id>
	<title>hmm.</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1256754120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now, if only we could ensure that ALL military hardware had kill switches, and that everybody on the planet knew how to use them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , if only we could ensure that ALL military hardware had kill switches , and that everybody on the planet knew how to use them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, if only we could ensure that ALL military hardware had kill switches, and that everybody on the planet knew how to use them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898861</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1256751240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whoops - I started thinking of the French <i>retreating</i> toward the west, then changed the wording to "looking" but forgot the change in direction.  Just another dumb American who doesn't know his geography, I guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoops - I started thinking of the French retreating toward the west , then changed the wording to " looking " but forgot the change in direction .
Just another dumb American who does n't know his geography , I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoops - I started thinking of the French retreating toward the west, then changed the wording to "looking" but forgot the change in direction.
Just another dumb American who doesn't know his geography, I guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897009</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895999</id>
	<title>Re:Syrians have U.S. military hardware ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>America's ability to influence what goes into enemy military hardware isn't constrained by what we directly supply.  With proper access and funding, we can influence what they build at home too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>America 's ability to influence what goes into enemy military hardware is n't constrained by what we directly supply .
With proper access and funding , we can influence what they build at home too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>America's ability to influence what goes into enemy military hardware isn't constrained by what we directly supply.
With proper access and funding, we can influence what they build at home too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897593</id>
	<title>SPC'd</title>
	<author>Ozlanthos</author>
	<datestamp>1256745840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I couldn't agree more. Outsourcing work is like taking a job from someone who has something to lose by not doing a job right, and giving it to someone who could give a shit either way as long as they get paid. Bad policy all the way around in my book. Lack of a direct line of accountability, or loyalty counts for a lot when you are talking about potential costs that you cannot foresee.
<br>
<br>
-Oz</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't agree more .
Outsourcing work is like taking a job from someone who has something to lose by not doing a job right , and giving it to someone who could give a shit either way as long as they get paid .
Bad policy all the way around in my book .
Lack of a direct line of accountability , or loyalty counts for a lot when you are talking about potential costs that you can not foresee .
-Oz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't agree more.
Outsourcing work is like taking a job from someone who has something to lose by not doing a job right, and giving it to someone who could give a shit either way as long as they get paid.
Bad policy all the way around in my book.
Lack of a direct line of accountability, or loyalty counts for a lot when you are talking about potential costs that you cannot foresee.
-Oz</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900079</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256756100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Is America planning to invade France?</i></p><p>In 1980 nobody would have dreamed we'd be invading Afghanistan; we were supplying the Taliban with arms to fight the Soviets with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is America planning to invade France ? In 1980 nobody would have dreamed we 'd be invading Afghanistan ; we were supplying the Taliban with arms to fight the Soviets with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is America planning to invade France?In 1980 nobody would have dreamed we'd be invading Afghanistan; we were supplying the Taliban with arms to fight the Soviets with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897009</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Although they we might have to tap them on the shoulder to get their attention - they've always previously surrendered while facing west.</p></div><p>I believe you mean East, the US is to the West of France, across that body of water named the Atlantic Ocean, look at a map, its all right there.  Unless you are meaning they were facing West with a pleading look on their faces when they surrendered.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although they we might have to tap them on the shoulder to get their attention - they 've always previously surrendered while facing west.I believe you mean East , the US is to the West of France , across that body of water named the Atlantic Ocean , look at a map , its all right there .
Unless you are meaning they were facing West with a pleading look on their faces when they surrendered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Although they we might have to tap them on the shoulder to get their attention - they've always previously surrendered while facing west.I believe you mean East, the US is to the West of France, across that body of water named the Atlantic Ocean, look at a map, its all right there.
Unless you are meaning they were facing West with a pleading look on their faces when they surrendered.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896431</id>
	<title>Colossus, WarGames, Battlestar:Galactica</title>
	<author>DutchUncle</author>
	<datestamp>1256741280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This idea isn't new. "Serious" science fiction since the 1950s has considered the more complex vulnerabilities of more complex systems, specifically including false takeover of control (Colossus and WarGames), malicious Trojan horses (Battlestar), and false triggering of safety/self-destruct signals (Keith Laumer's Bolo stories) (and yes, I know some of those examples aren't the highest quality, but they're well known). The only disappointment in this article is the apparent surprise expressed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This idea is n't new .
" Serious " science fiction since the 1950s has considered the more complex vulnerabilities of more complex systems , specifically including false takeover of control ( Colossus and WarGames ) , malicious Trojan horses ( Battlestar ) , and false triggering of safety/self-destruct signals ( Keith Laumer 's Bolo stories ) ( and yes , I know some of those examples are n't the highest quality , but they 're well known ) .
The only disappointment in this article is the apparent surprise expressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This idea isn't new.
"Serious" science fiction since the 1950s has considered the more complex vulnerabilities of more complex systems, specifically including false takeover of control (Colossus and WarGames), malicious Trojan horses (Battlestar), and false triggering of safety/self-destruct signals (Keith Laumer's Bolo stories) (and yes, I know some of those examples aren't the highest quality, but they're well known).
The only disappointment in this article is the apparent surprise expressed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896089</id>
	<title>Backdoor</title>
	<author>michaelmalak</author>
	<datestamp>1256739780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>IEEE Spectrum properly refers to the attack on the Syrian hardware as a "back door".  The New York Times not only failed to use the <a href="http://catb.org/jargon/" title="catb.org">Hacker's Dictionary</a> [catb.org], it failed to use the terminology from IEEE Spectrum, which it even hyperlinked to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IEEE Spectrum properly refers to the attack on the Syrian hardware as a " back door " .
The New York Times not only failed to use the Hacker 's Dictionary [ catb.org ] , it failed to use the terminology from IEEE Spectrum , which it even hyperlinked to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IEEE Spectrum properly refers to the attack on the Syrian hardware as a "back door".
The New York Times not only failed to use the Hacker's Dictionary [catb.org], it failed to use the terminology from IEEE Spectrum, which it even hyperlinked to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896773</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1256742660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.</p></div></blockquote><p>I take offense at this, considering that without "American tech" Europe would be Germany.  It's not enough that we have to save your bacon, but you want us to pay for your missile defense, and you're <i>still</i> rude.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100 \ % on american tech , both on hardware and software.I take offense at this , considering that without " American tech " Europe would be Germany .
It 's not enough that we have to save your bacon , but you want us to pay for your missile defense , and you 're still rude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this should be a really big wakeup call to european countries that relies 100\% on american tech, both on hardware and software.I take offense at this, considering that without "American tech" Europe would be Germany.
It's not enough that we have to save your bacon, but you want us to pay for your missile defense, and you're still rude.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898059</id>
	<title>Re:F16-IN</title>
	<author>Nidi62</author>
	<datestamp>1256747640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Usually exported technology is simply downgraded so that it is not on the same level.  Generally, for aircraft, this would involve removal of the radars, both search and fire control.  Im sure they downgrade the avionics some as well.  The point is giving an ally an aircraft that can hold its own against most of the world but, should that ally become hostile or the technology seized, it is not on equal terms with our own fighters unless they've managed to purchase or develop their own packages.  Plus, it's so much easier to win an air battle when your opponent is using the old Soviet model, ie fire control from a central point(whether a ground station or an aerial radar platform).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Usually exported technology is simply downgraded so that it is not on the same level .
Generally , for aircraft , this would involve removal of the radars , both search and fire control .
Im sure they downgrade the avionics some as well .
The point is giving an ally an aircraft that can hold its own against most of the world but , should that ally become hostile or the technology seized , it is not on equal terms with our own fighters unless they 've managed to purchase or develop their own packages .
Plus , it 's so much easier to win an air battle when your opponent is using the old Soviet model , ie fire control from a central point ( whether a ground station or an aerial radar platform ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usually exported technology is simply downgraded so that it is not on the same level.
Generally, for aircraft, this would involve removal of the radars, both search and fire control.
Im sure they downgrade the avionics some as well.
The point is giving an ally an aircraft that can hold its own against most of the world but, should that ally become hostile or the technology seized, it is not on equal terms with our own fighters unless they've managed to purchase or develop their own packages.
Plus, it's so much easier to win an air battle when your opponent is using the old Soviet model, ie fire control from a central point(whether a ground station or an aerial radar platform).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897115</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896997</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>aminorex</author>
	<datestamp>1256743440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Warning for the US which has &gt;90\% of its call processing run by Israeli devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Warning for the US which has &gt; 90 \ % of its call processing run by Israeli devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Warning for the US which has &gt;90\% of its call processing run by Israeli devices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896123</id>
	<title>Radars and kill switch</title>
	<author>renoX</author>
	<datestamp>1256740020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A kill switch needs external communication to be activated which can be quite impossible to implement in many case but radars are basically radio receivers so a specific sequence of radio impulsion at a given frequency could activate the kill switch..<br>Interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A kill switch needs external communication to be activated which can be quite impossible to implement in many case but radars are basically radio receivers so a specific sequence of radio impulsion at a given frequency could activate the kill switch..Interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A kill switch needs external communication to be activated which can be quite impossible to implement in many case but radars are basically radio receivers so a specific sequence of radio impulsion at a given frequency could activate the kill switch..Interesting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896585</id>
	<title>The Syrian radar disable code:</title>
	<author>Veramocor</author>
	<datestamp>1256741940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've obtained the secret code used to disable the radar systems:</p><p>1-6-3-0-9</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've obtained the secret code used to disable the radar systems : 1-6-3-0-9</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've obtained the secret code used to disable the radar systems:1-6-3-0-9</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896259</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Hal\_Porter</author>
	<datestamp>1256740680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's assuming you can do it yourself. Syria is hardly a hotbed of industry and innovation, and most of the Middle East is even worse. E.g. when Libya gave up their "nuclear and biological weapons program", which had been reasonably well funded and resourced over several decades had lead to only one viable weapon, a landmine spiked with human faeces.</p><p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/21/politics.libya" title="guardian.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/21/politics.libya</a> [guardian.co.uk] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Libya's biological weapons programme too has suffered from similar mismanagement and lack of funds, say sources; at best succeeding in producing munitions boobytrapped with human faeces that can be fatal if it enters the blood stream.</p> </div><p>So it's not too surprising these sorts of countries decided to buy stuff from the USSR instead. Unfortunately for them the Russians had a cunning plan with weapons. Soviet weapons systems actually came in two variants - a high end one to be made in peace time and a stripped down one to be made in a war quickly and in larger quantities. The export customers got the stripped down version, known as the 'monkey model'.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey\_model" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey\_model</a> [wikipedia.org] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>The term was popularized in the West by Viktor Suvorov, in Inside the Soviet Army. Suvorov states that the simplified monkey model was designed for massive production in wartime, to replace front-line stocks if a war should last for several weeks. In peacetime, Soviet industry gained experience building both standard and monkey-model variants, the latter being for sale "to the 'brothers' and 'friends' of the USSR as the very latest equipment available." He also cites the benefit of disinformation when an exported monkey model fell into the hands of Western intelligence, who "naturally gained a completely false impression of the true combat capabilities of the BMP-1 and of Soviet tanks".</p></div><p>I.e. the monkey model looked the same or similar to the domestic version but was cheaper to make and had far inferior capabilities.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's assuming you can do it yourself .
Syria is hardly a hotbed of industry and innovation , and most of the Middle East is even worse .
E.g. when Libya gave up their " nuclear and biological weapons program " , which had been reasonably well funded and resourced over several decades had lead to only one viable weapon , a landmine spiked with human faeces.http : //www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/21/politics.libya [ guardian.co.uk ] Libya 's biological weapons programme too has suffered from similar mismanagement and lack of funds , say sources ; at best succeeding in producing munitions boobytrapped with human faeces that can be fatal if it enters the blood stream .
So it 's not too surprising these sorts of countries decided to buy stuff from the USSR instead .
Unfortunately for them the Russians had a cunning plan with weapons .
Soviet weapons systems actually came in two variants - a high end one to be made in peace time and a stripped down one to be made in a war quickly and in larger quantities .
The export customers got the stripped down version , known as the 'monkey model'.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey \ _model [ wikipedia.org ] The term was popularized in the West by Viktor Suvorov , in Inside the Soviet Army .
Suvorov states that the simplified monkey model was designed for massive production in wartime , to replace front-line stocks if a war should last for several weeks .
In peacetime , Soviet industry gained experience building both standard and monkey-model variants , the latter being for sale " to the 'brothers ' and 'friends ' of the USSR as the very latest equipment available .
" He also cites the benefit of disinformation when an exported monkey model fell into the hands of Western intelligence , who " naturally gained a completely false impression of the true combat capabilities of the BMP-1 and of Soviet tanks " .I.e .
the monkey model looked the same or similar to the domestic version but was cheaper to make and had far inferior capabilities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's assuming you can do it yourself.
Syria is hardly a hotbed of industry and innovation, and most of the Middle East is even worse.
E.g. when Libya gave up their "nuclear and biological weapons program", which had been reasonably well funded and resourced over several decades had lead to only one viable weapon, a landmine spiked with human faeces.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/21/politics.libya [guardian.co.uk] Libya's biological weapons programme too has suffered from similar mismanagement and lack of funds, say sources; at best succeeding in producing munitions boobytrapped with human faeces that can be fatal if it enters the blood stream.
So it's not too surprising these sorts of countries decided to buy stuff from the USSR instead.
Unfortunately for them the Russians had a cunning plan with weapons.
Soviet weapons systems actually came in two variants - a high end one to be made in peace time and a stripped down one to be made in a war quickly and in larger quantities.
The export customers got the stripped down version, known as the 'monkey model'.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey\_model [wikipedia.org] The term was popularized in the West by Viktor Suvorov, in Inside the Soviet Army.
Suvorov states that the simplified monkey model was designed for massive production in wartime, to replace front-line stocks if a war should last for several weeks.
In peacetime, Soviet industry gained experience building both standard and monkey-model variants, the latter being for sale "to the 'brothers' and 'friends' of the USSR as the very latest equipment available.
" He also cites the benefit of disinformation when an exported monkey model fell into the hands of Western intelligence, who "naturally gained a completely false impression of the true combat capabilities of the BMP-1 and of Soviet tanks".I.e.
the monkey model looked the same or similar to the domestic version but was cheaper to make and had far inferior capabilities.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29908111</id>
	<title>Stop citing my doorcode please ?</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1256814960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, you, could you please stop broadcasting my door entry code ? Thank you!</p><p>We've already got enough unidentified visitors here with this new Diebold supersafe doorlock!</p><p>Thank you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , you , could you please stop broadcasting my door entry code ?
Thank you ! We 've already got enough unidentified visitors here with this new Diebold supersafe doorlock ! Thank you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, you, could you please stop broadcasting my door entry code ?
Thank you!We've already got enough unidentified visitors here with this new Diebold supersafe doorlock!Thank you!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898315</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>daem0n1x</author>
	<datestamp>1256748780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
You call it <i>missile defense</i>, we call it Star Wars. We didn't ask for it, we don't want it, we don't need it.
</p><p>
It was your former president that lobbied the kiss-US-ass governments of Poland and Check Republic to <i>allow</i> him to plant that shit in their territories. By the way, with intense opposition of their own populations and the rest of the Europeans.
</p><p>
Save your money. Spend it in useful things like healthcare and education. You need them.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You call it missile defense , we call it Star Wars .
We did n't ask for it , we do n't want it , we do n't need it .
It was your former president that lobbied the kiss-US-ass governments of Poland and Check Republic to allow him to plant that shit in their territories .
By the way , with intense opposition of their own populations and the rest of the Europeans .
Save your money .
Spend it in useful things like healthcare and education .
You need them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You call it missile defense, we call it Star Wars.
We didn't ask for it, we don't want it, we don't need it.
It was your former president that lobbied the kiss-US-ass governments of Poland and Check Republic to allow him to plant that shit in their territories.
By the way, with intense opposition of their own populations and the rest of the Europeans.
Save your money.
Spend it in useful things like healthcare and education.
You need them.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896113</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson learned?</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1256739960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, they can't.  There's not a chip fab anywhere in Syria.  Hell, there aren't even any in the US, anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , they ca n't .
There 's not a chip fab anywhere in Syria .
Hell , there are n't even any in the US , anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, they can't.
There's not a chip fab anywhere in Syria.
Hell, there aren't even any in the US, anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895731</id>
	<title>Re:Open Source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256737980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot Open Source Intelligence, Open Source recruiting.... Next thing you know they'll crowd source 4chan against a religion...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot Open Source Intelligence , Open Source recruiting.... Next thing you know they 'll crowd source 4chan against a religion.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot Open Source Intelligence, Open Source recruiting.... Next thing you know they'll crowd source 4chan against a religion...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898459</id>
	<title>Re:Semiconductor Executive Should Be Investigated</title>
	<author>toddhisattva</author>
	<datestamp>1256749380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was <b>Hector Ruiz</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was Hector Ruiz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was Hector Ruiz.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29901801
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899951
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898859
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898459
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897951
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898605
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896127
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29914599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29908111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29905751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899919
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899361
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898951
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29908517
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895967
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900079
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898059
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29903403
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898353
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1211228_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29901801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897593
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895747
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895777
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897299
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896019
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897667
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29914599
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898591
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898951
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29908111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897535
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898605
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899305
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896293
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896107
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896879
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895743
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895993
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899919
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897123
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896163
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896305
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897009
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898861
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898073
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899361
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900079
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29906727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896773
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898315
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29908517
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900037
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896123
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29905751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900767
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896127
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898561
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29900995
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29895749
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899951
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897951
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896045
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29896057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29899351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29898723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29903403
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897963
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1211228.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1211228.29897849
</commentlist>
</conversation>
