<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_18_0738253</id>
	<title>Police In Britain Arrest Man For Bomb-Threat Joke On Twitter</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1263807720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"A British man was <a href="http://forth.ie/index.php/content/article/forth\_elsewhere\_british\_police\_arrest\_man\_under\_terror\_legislation\_for\_inte/">arrested under anti-terrorism legislation for making a bomb joke on Twitter</a>. Paul Chambers, 26, was arrested under the  provisions of the Terrorism Act (2006). His crime? Frustrated at grounded flights over inclement weather, he made a joke bomb threat on the social networking site Twitter."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " A British man was arrested under anti-terrorism legislation for making a bomb joke on Twitter .
Paul Chambers , 26 , was arrested under the provisions of the Terrorism Act ( 2006 ) .
His crime ?
Frustrated at grounded flights over inclement weather , he made a joke bomb threat on the social networking site Twitter .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "A British man was arrested under anti-terrorism legislation for making a bomb joke on Twitter.
Paul Chambers, 26, was arrested under the  provisions of the Terrorism Act (2006).
His crime?
Frustrated at grounded flights over inclement weather, he made a joke bomb threat on the social networking site Twitter.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808998</id>
	<title>Welcome to the real world</title>
	<author>DaveV1.0</author>
	<datestamp>1263835920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the real world, people actually do things like blowing up airplanes and buildings. To say you are going to do so in a very public and disseminated manner is, at best, stupid and definitely invites such actions by the authorities because you have left them no choice.</p><p>These are their choices:</p><ol><li>If the authorities ignore the threat and the person posting the threat follows through, people die and the authorities get raked over the coals for not following up on it.</li><li>If the authorities treat the threat as serious, one person is inconvenienced and embarrassed.</li></ol><p>They are going to error on the side of "no one dies" and not "a dumbass is inconvenienced and embarrassed".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the real world , people actually do things like blowing up airplanes and buildings .
To say you are going to do so in a very public and disseminated manner is , at best , stupid and definitely invites such actions by the authorities because you have left them no choice.These are their choices : If the authorities ignore the threat and the person posting the threat follows through , people die and the authorities get raked over the coals for not following up on it.If the authorities treat the threat as serious , one person is inconvenienced and embarrassed.They are going to error on the side of " no one dies " and not " a dumbass is inconvenienced and embarrassed " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the real world, people actually do things like blowing up airplanes and buildings.
To say you are going to do so in a very public and disseminated manner is, at best, stupid and definitely invites such actions by the authorities because you have left them no choice.These are their choices:If the authorities ignore the threat and the person posting the threat follows through, people die and the authorities get raked over the coals for not following up on it.If the authorities treat the threat as serious, one person is inconvenienced and embarrassed.They are going to error on the side of "no one dies" and not "a dumbass is inconvenienced and embarrassed".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806666</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Rogerborg</author>
	<datestamp>1263821280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They quickly saw there was nothing to it.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Y'all a professional retard, or just a gifted amateur?

</p><p> <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html" title="independent.co.uk" rel="nofollow">He has been bailed until 11 February, when he will be told whether or not he will be charged with conspiring to create a bomb hoax. In the interim, detectives have confiscated his iPhone, laptop and home computer.</a> [independent.co.uk]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They quickly saw there was nothing to it .
Y'all a professional retard , or just a gifted amateur ?
He has been bailed until 11 February , when he will be told whether or not he will be charged with conspiring to create a bomb hoax .
In the interim , detectives have confiscated his iPhone , laptop and home computer .
[ independent.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They quickly saw there was nothing to it.
Y'all a professional retard, or just a gifted amateur?
He has been bailed until 11 February, when he will be told whether or not he will be charged with conspiring to create a bomb hoax.
In the interim, detectives have confiscated his iPhone, laptop and home computer.
[independent.co.uk]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807964</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263830280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly, I'm not sure which side I'm on. The guy makes a joke on twitter, which is public and made for raw <strong>information</strong> without context.</p><p>One of those words does not belong in this sentence. (Hint: I emphasiszed it for you.)<br>If you take stuff on Twitter serious, you should be going to a mental hospital right now.<br>In fact if you can find any real information at all in a Twitter post, you should already be in intense counseling.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It is akin to write a tag saying the same thing in front of the airport.</p></div><p>No it is not. Why? <em>Because Twitter is not an airport!</em><br>It&rsquo;t&rsquo;s a &ldquo;&lsquo;tardpord&rdquo; (in Idiocracy speak). Which explains why the British Police was listening in. ^^<br>Which explains the behavior of the British Police too.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Also, you&rsquo;re already starting from the wrong and twisted base assumption, that it would be ok to do anything more than a weird look, when someone makes a bomb threat <em> <strong>JOKE</strong> </em> in front of the airport.</p><p>Sorry, but all this because of how many? Five incidents or so? With nothing bad happening in nearly all of them?? (And they all being vastly overblown. Yes, they all. In the week of 9/11 <em>tenthousand</em> indians died in a giant landslide/flood thing. Nobody cared! Even I can&rsquo;t remember what exactly it was. I just will remember it forever because of how shocking it was how wrong those priorities were.)</p><p>With that amount of &ldquo;terrorism&rdquo;, especially relative to just about everything out there, like the number of people the war in Iraq and Afghanistan killed, the number of car accidents, the damage that it did that New Orleans was just plain ignored, etc, &ldquo;terrorism&rdquo; has so little noteworthyness, that I can openly and without shame say that:</p><p><strong>THERE IS <em>NO</em> TERRORISM!</strong></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I 'm not sure which side I 'm on .
The guy makes a joke on twitter , which is public and made for raw information without context.One of those words does not belong in this sentence .
( Hint : I emphasiszed it for you .
) If you take stuff on Twitter serious , you should be going to a mental hospital right now.In fact if you can find any real information at all in a Twitter post , you should already be in intense counseling.It is akin to write a tag saying the same thing in front of the airport.No it is not .
Why ? Because Twitter is not an airport ! It    t    s a       tardpord    ( in Idiocracy speak ) .
Which explains why the British Police was listening in .
^ ^ Which explains the behavior of the British Police too .
; ) Also , you    re already starting from the wrong and twisted base assumption , that it would be ok to do anything more than a weird look , when someone makes a bomb threat JOKE in front of the airport.Sorry , but all this because of how many ?
Five incidents or so ?
With nothing bad happening in nearly all of them ? ?
( And they all being vastly overblown .
Yes , they all .
In the week of 9/11 tenthousand indians died in a giant landslide/flood thing .
Nobody cared !
Even I can    t remember what exactly it was .
I just will remember it forever because of how shocking it was how wrong those priorities were .
) With that amount of    terrorism    , especially relative to just about everything out there , like the number of people the war in Iraq and Afghanistan killed , the number of car accidents , the damage that it did that New Orleans was just plain ignored , etc ,    terrorism    has so little noteworthyness , that I can openly and without shame say that : THERE IS NO TERRORISM !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I'm not sure which side I'm on.
The guy makes a joke on twitter, which is public and made for raw information without context.One of those words does not belong in this sentence.
(Hint: I emphasiszed it for you.
)If you take stuff on Twitter serious, you should be going to a mental hospital right now.In fact if you can find any real information at all in a Twitter post, you should already be in intense counseling.It is akin to write a tag saying the same thing in front of the airport.No it is not.
Why? Because Twitter is not an airport!It’t’s a “‘tardpord” (in Idiocracy speak).
Which explains why the British Police was listening in.
^^Which explains the behavior of the British Police too.
;)Also, you’re already starting from the wrong and twisted base assumption, that it would be ok to do anything more than a weird look, when someone makes a bomb threat  JOKE  in front of the airport.Sorry, but all this because of how many?
Five incidents or so?
With nothing bad happening in nearly all of them??
(And they all being vastly overblown.
Yes, they all.
In the week of 9/11 tenthousand indians died in a giant landslide/flood thing.
Nobody cared!
Even I can’t remember what exactly it was.
I just will remember it forever because of how shocking it was how wrong those priorities were.
)With that amount of “terrorism”, especially relative to just about everything out there, like the number of people the war in Iraq and Afghanistan killed, the number of car accidents, the damage that it did that New Orleans was just plain ignored, etc, “terrorism” has so little noteworthyness, that I can openly and without shame say that:THERE IS NO TERRORISM!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806986</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Saint Stephen</author>
	<datestamp>1263823680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It takes a major moron to think that making a joke about a bomb threat in today's world isn't the dumbest frickin thing to do.  Duh.  How about some common sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It takes a major moron to think that making a joke about a bomb threat in today 's world is n't the dumbest frickin thing to do .
Duh. How about some common sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It takes a major moron to think that making a joke about a bomb threat in today's world isn't the dumbest frickin thing to do.
Duh.  How about some common sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806054</id>
	<title>Re:Living in fear</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263813600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up. what should i do ?</p></div><p>You should take the bus, of course. I have a much more serious problem, I'm so horny I'm about to explode, but my blow-up doll is flat! Somebody blow up my blow-up doll, please! If you're a sexy adult female (I'll even take a MILF!), post your naughty pic on 4chan and post your blow job application here. Cheers!</p><p>Explosively yours,<br>XOX</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up .
what should i do ? You should take the bus , of course .
I have a much more serious problem , I 'm so horny I 'm about to explode , but my blow-up doll is flat !
Somebody blow up my blow-up doll , please !
If you 're a sexy adult female ( I 'll even take a MILF !
) , post your naughty pic on 4chan and post your blow job application here .
Cheers ! Explosively yours,XOX</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up.
what should i do ?You should take the bus, of course.
I have a much more serious problem, I'm so horny I'm about to explode, but my blow-up doll is flat!
Somebody blow up my blow-up doll, please!
If you're a sexy adult female (I'll even take a MILF!
), post your naughty pic on 4chan and post your blow job application here.
Cheers!Explosively yours,XOX
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806312</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Johann Lau</author>
	<datestamp>1263816660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"politicians (and the police) would understand. Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual"."</p></div></blockquote><p>But a warning for whom? Certainly not for callous powermongers, because at least in that book, Big Brother wins. And runs (sick, sad, twisted) victory laps in eternity. At least that's how I read it.</p><p>One cannot buy into the premise that some people should decide what's good for all people, and accept a minority owning the majority figuratively and literally, and then expect any other outcome in the long run?</p><p>IMHO we shouldn't wish for politicians to understand anything, we should seek for the people to care for themselves and one another more than they do. To condemn Big Brother is like explaining cancer cells how they actually *ought* to behave... instead of explaining that to the immune system as long as there is still anything left of it.</p><p>I know this is off-topic and honestly, it just feels good to say it so I did =)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" politicians ( and the police ) would understand .
Orwell 's 1984 is a warning , not a " HOWTO manual " .
" But a warning for whom ?
Certainly not for callous powermongers , because at least in that book , Big Brother wins .
And runs ( sick , sad , twisted ) victory laps in eternity .
At least that 's how I read it.One can not buy into the premise that some people should decide what 's good for all people , and accept a minority owning the majority figuratively and literally , and then expect any other outcome in the long run ? IMHO we should n't wish for politicians to understand anything , we should seek for the people to care for themselves and one another more than they do .
To condemn Big Brother is like explaining cancer cells how they actually * ought * to behave... instead of explaining that to the immune system as long as there is still anything left of it.I know this is off-topic and honestly , it just feels good to say it so I did = )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"politicians (and the police) would understand.
Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual".
"But a warning for whom?
Certainly not for callous powermongers, because at least in that book, Big Brother wins.
And runs (sick, sad, twisted) victory laps in eternity.
At least that's how I read it.One cannot buy into the premise that some people should decide what's good for all people, and accept a minority owning the majority figuratively and literally, and then expect any other outcome in the long run?IMHO we shouldn't wish for politicians to understand anything, we should seek for the people to care for themselves and one another more than they do.
To condemn Big Brother is like explaining cancer cells how they actually *ought* to behave... instead of explaining that to the immune system as long as there is still anything left of it.I know this is off-topic and honestly, it just feels good to say it so I did =)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807328</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>asylumx</author>
	<datestamp>1263826500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it was a joke, it wasn't a very good one.  People keep saying it was a joke but typically a joke should be somewhat funny and this tweet really wasn't funny at all.  I don't feel at all threatened by it, but clearly somebody did.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it was a joke , it was n't a very good one .
People keep saying it was a joke but typically a joke should be somewhat funny and this tweet really was n't funny at all .
I do n't feel at all threatened by it , but clearly somebody did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it was a joke, it wasn't a very good one.
People keep saying it was a joke but typically a joke should be somewhat funny and this tweet really wasn't funny at all.
I don't feel at all threatened by it, but clearly somebody did.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896</id>
	<title>What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>heretic108</author>
	<datestamp>1263811680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tor, I2P, and thousands of anonymising proxies all over the web. The guy totally has no excuse.</p><p>If you're going to say stuff that could bring down unwanted consequences, then do it in a way that's extremely difficult to trace back to you personally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tor , I2P , and thousands of anonymising proxies all over the web .
The guy totally has no excuse.If you 're going to say stuff that could bring down unwanted consequences , then do it in a way that 's extremely difficult to trace back to you personally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tor, I2P, and thousands of anonymising proxies all over the web.
The guy totally has no excuse.If you're going to say stuff that could bring down unwanted consequences, then do it in a way that's extremely difficult to trace back to you personally.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805882</id>
	<title>I see another headline . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263811560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Police in  arrest man for Joke on Bomb-Thread Joke on Twitter."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Police in arrest man for Joke on Bomb-Thread Joke on Twitter .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Police in  arrest man for Joke on Bomb-Thread Joke on Twitter.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811336</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>turbidostato</author>
	<datestamp>1263846720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's been UK police policy for at least two decades [...] His post could have been a joke, or it could have been a crazy person who actually meant it. It's the job of the police to check which it is, and that may include arresting him."</p><p>That would seem quite a good policy.  It's only that is *NOT* UK police policy as per the current example.</p><p>It's more "arrest first, then check" than the other way around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's been UK police policy for at least two decades [ ... ] His post could have been a joke , or it could have been a crazy person who actually meant it .
It 's the job of the police to check which it is , and that may include arresting him .
" That would seem quite a good policy .
It 's only that is * NOT * UK police policy as per the current example.It 's more " arrest first , then check " than the other way around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's been UK police policy for at least two decades [...] His post could have been a joke, or it could have been a crazy person who actually meant it.
It's the job of the police to check which it is, and that may include arresting him.
"That would seem quite a good policy.
It's only that is *NOT* UK police policy as per the current example.It's more "arrest first, then check" than the other way around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807612</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1263828540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties.</p></div><p>Your point?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties.Your point ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties.Your point?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805962</id>
	<title>The story is actully on the Independent.co.uk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html" title="independent.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html</a> [independent.co.uk]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html [ independent.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html [independent.co.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806220</id>
	<title>Guess Britain and the U.S. are safe of Qaeda now</title>
	<author>fadir</author>
	<datestamp>1263815580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no need for more attacks, the authorities do a splendid job at keeping their citizens frightened and in fear.<br>Probably just a question of time until they start bigger raids and maybe even start to execute people to be sure that those cannot cause any harm.</p><p>What has the world come to? One bigger terrorist attack and the U.S. bombs the shit out of 2 countries. Some more unsuccessful tries and several countries go mental and start to treat everyone like a possible mass murderer. I guess I get banned from several countries now for posting subversive messages and being a possible threat as well.</p><p>Time to relocate to a lonely island, a long forgotten cave on Antarctica or into a tend in the desert. That sounds almost comfortable compared to what we experience here at the moment.</p><p>(Oh for sarcastically disabled people and authorities: that was sarcasm, all of it. Gotta make sure to add that to every post on the net now. You never know who's just waiting with a gun next to your door<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no need for more attacks , the authorities do a splendid job at keeping their citizens frightened and in fear.Probably just a question of time until they start bigger raids and maybe even start to execute people to be sure that those can not cause any harm.What has the world come to ?
One bigger terrorist attack and the U.S. bombs the shit out of 2 countries .
Some more unsuccessful tries and several countries go mental and start to treat everyone like a possible mass murderer .
I guess I get banned from several countries now for posting subversive messages and being a possible threat as well.Time to relocate to a lonely island , a long forgotten cave on Antarctica or into a tend in the desert .
That sounds almost comfortable compared to what we experience here at the moment .
( Oh for sarcastically disabled people and authorities : that was sarcasm , all of it .
Got ta make sure to add that to every post on the net now .
You never know who 's just waiting with a gun next to your door ... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no need for more attacks, the authorities do a splendid job at keeping their citizens frightened and in fear.Probably just a question of time until they start bigger raids and maybe even start to execute people to be sure that those cannot cause any harm.What has the world come to?
One bigger terrorist attack and the U.S. bombs the shit out of 2 countries.
Some more unsuccessful tries and several countries go mental and start to treat everyone like a possible mass murderer.
I guess I get banned from several countries now for posting subversive messages and being a possible threat as well.Time to relocate to a lonely island, a long forgotten cave on Antarctica or into a tend in the desert.
That sounds almost comfortable compared to what we experience here at the moment.
(Oh for sarcastically disabled people and authorities: that was sarcasm, all of it.
Gotta make sure to add that to every post on the net now.
You never know who's just waiting with a gun next to your door ...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806322</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263816780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You get arrested then released without charge, the police take and store your DNA. The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong, Labour say they don't care.</p></div><p>Firstly, the European Court of Human Rights isn't an EU institution. Secondly, the law to replace to amend the DNA retention rules to comply with the court ruling is being debated today. It depresses me that hardly anyone even seems to have noticed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You get arrested then released without charge , the police take and store your DNA .
The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong , Labour say they do n't care.Firstly , the European Court of Human Rights is n't an EU institution .
Secondly , the law to replace to amend the DNA retention rules to comply with the court ruling is being debated today .
It depresses me that hardly anyone even seems to have noticed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You get arrested then released without charge, the police take and store your DNA.
The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong, Labour say they don't care.Firstly, the European Court of Human Rights isn't an EU institution.
Secondly, the law to replace to amend the DNA retention rules to comply with the court ruling is being debated today.
It depresses me that hardly anyone even seems to have noticed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811756</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Cederic</author>
	<datestamp>1263805500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the UK verbal intimidation can be an assault. No physical interaction is required.</p><p>I wont comment on whether that's a good thing or not, and I can't be arsed to quote the case law that backs me up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the UK verbal intimidation can be an assault .
No physical interaction is required.I wont comment on whether that 's a good thing or not , and I ca n't be arsed to quote the case law that backs me up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the UK verbal intimidation can be an assault.
No physical interaction is required.I wont comment on whether that's a good thing or not, and I can't be arsed to quote the case law that backs me up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808132</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Cimexus</author>
	<datestamp>1263831240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just to clarify<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the above does ~not~ mean that you have to physically assault someone before it becomes a crime, in Australia at least.</p><p>"that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence" does not require the violence to occur, just that the person honestly believes that violence is immediately about to be imposed on them. I.e. that they are fearful for their life or wellbeing.</p><p>So there are three situations here:</p><p>1. Mere threat without any real hint of physical action. This would be assault in the US, but not in AU/NZ, as correctly stated by the parent post.</p><p>2. Reasonable belief that you are about to have violence inflicted upon you in the immediate future (i.e. the next few seconds). This would be assault in AU/NZ (and the US one would assume).</p><p>3. Actual physical violence: this is in fact 'battery' in AU/NZ, although colloquially people call it an assault. But actually assault was the fear of the violence that occurred immediately before this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the physical act is a battery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to clarify ... the above does ~ not ~ mean that you have to physically assault someone before it becomes a crime , in Australia at least .
" that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence " does not require the violence to occur , just that the person honestly believes that violence is immediately about to be imposed on them .
I.e. that they are fearful for their life or wellbeing.So there are three situations here : 1 .
Mere threat without any real hint of physical action .
This would be assault in the US , but not in AU/NZ , as correctly stated by the parent post.2 .
Reasonable belief that you are about to have violence inflicted upon you in the immediate future ( i.e .
the next few seconds ) .
This would be assault in AU/NZ ( and the US one would assume ) .3 .
Actual physical violence : this is in fact 'battery ' in AU/NZ , although colloquially people call it an assault .
But actually assault was the fear of the violence that occurred immediately before this ... the physical act is a battery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just to clarify ... the above does ~not~ mean that you have to physically assault someone before it becomes a crime, in Australia at least.
"that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence" does not require the violence to occur, just that the person honestly believes that violence is immediately about to be imposed on them.
I.e. that they are fearful for their life or wellbeing.So there are three situations here:1.
Mere threat without any real hint of physical action.
This would be assault in the US, but not in AU/NZ, as correctly stated by the parent post.2.
Reasonable belief that you are about to have violence inflicted upon you in the immediate future (i.e.
the next few seconds).
This would be assault in AU/NZ (and the US one would assume).3.
Actual physical violence: this is in fact 'battery' in AU/NZ, although colloquially people call it an assault.
But actually assault was the fear of the violence that occurred immediately before this ... the physical act is a battery.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807142</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263825120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;It really comes to something when we need to worry more about our own police and politicians than we ever would about a terror attack.</p><p>Well it seems quite obvious that the terrorists have won - People are afraid in their own countries and homes, looking over their shoulder all the time.</p><p>Blow up a couple of skyscrapers - Watch the 'West world' consume itself with paranoia and descent into a fascist hell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; It really comes to something when we need to worry more about our own police and politicians than we ever would about a terror attack.Well it seems quite obvious that the terrorists have won - People are afraid in their own countries and homes , looking over their shoulder all the time.Blow up a couple of skyscrapers - Watch the 'West world ' consume itself with paranoia and descent into a fascist hell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;It really comes to something when we need to worry more about our own police and politicians than we ever would about a terror attack.Well it seems quite obvious that the terrorists have won - People are afraid in their own countries and homes, looking over their shoulder all the time.Blow up a couple of skyscrapers - Watch the 'West world' consume itself with paranoia and descent into a fascist hell.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807656</id>
	<title>Not that bad</title>
	<author>marco13185</author>
	<datestamp>1263828780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>However misguided this is, I seriously doubt that the police did this with malicious intent.  I also doubt that we have all the facts.  The police in the UK don't go around arresting people who say silly things about bombs, it's a waste of resources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However misguided this is , I seriously doubt that the police did this with malicious intent .
I also doubt that we have all the facts .
The police in the UK do n't go around arresting people who say silly things about bombs , it 's a waste of resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However misguided this is, I seriously doubt that the police did this with malicious intent.
I also doubt that we have all the facts.
The police in the UK don't go around arresting people who say silly things about bombs, it's a waste of resources.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811000</id>
	<title>Re:everyone here complaining about this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263845040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>are also complaining that the christmas crotch bomber was not caught. damned if you do, damned if you don't</p></div><p>Uh...no.  Those complaining about this are generally people like me.  The ones who know the underwear bomber was a moron who fucking <b>succeed</b> in his plot, as in, managed to get the explosive in the plane AND managed to light them.  And the only one he managed to harm was himself, as he set his pants on fire.</p><p>That's what we're fighting idiots.  That's what we're inconveniencing massive amounts of people and spending so much money on.  Sure, every once in a while, people manage to be successful.  It's far more likely that you're going to die in an armed robbery at your nearest gas station.  Why don't you make the gas-stations super-secure?</p><p>Reasonable people are the ones who are willing to pay the price for the eventual terrorist now and then who is successful, because that is far better than the authority arresting every single moron making a dumbass joke online (sure, it wasn't funny, he's a moron, but the intention was a joke, not a bomb threat).  People like us are tired of no longer being able to hang out with our family until boarding the plane because they can't get past the security station without boarding passes.  People like us are tired of not being able to carry a bottle of water through the security x-ray machine, but high-energy lithium ion batteries with our laptops are fine.  And no, that last one was not a suggestion to prohibit laptops on airplanes.  It's to just fucking let me have my liquids.</p><p>In other words, I <b>do not</b> expect every single wrongdoer to be caught before he performs his evil actions.  That's completely fucking unrealistic.  In fact, we're already way past the point of diminishing returns.  For every 0.01\% extra safety you get, you're giving up a lot of your rights.  Fuck...that.  I'd rather not be that 0.01\% safer.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the real world effect of ubiquitous cameras is its use AGAINST the state. understand you orwell parrotting pseudointellectual twits?</p></div><p>We don't want nor need the government with those cameras for that purpose.  We have people with cell phone cameras, and that's enough.  Except of course, that you're not <a href="http://blogs.amnesty.org.uk/blogs\_entry.asp?eid=2651" title="amnesty.org.uk" rel="nofollow">allowed to do that</a> [amnesty.org.uk] </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>are also complaining that the christmas crotch bomber was not caught .
damned if you do , damned if you don'tUh...no .
Those complaining about this are generally people like me .
The ones who know the underwear bomber was a moron who fucking succeed in his plot , as in , managed to get the explosive in the plane AND managed to light them .
And the only one he managed to harm was himself , as he set his pants on fire.That 's what we 're fighting idiots .
That 's what we 're inconveniencing massive amounts of people and spending so much money on .
Sure , every once in a while , people manage to be successful .
It 's far more likely that you 're going to die in an armed robbery at your nearest gas station .
Why do n't you make the gas-stations super-secure ? Reasonable people are the ones who are willing to pay the price for the eventual terrorist now and then who is successful , because that is far better than the authority arresting every single moron making a dumbass joke online ( sure , it was n't funny , he 's a moron , but the intention was a joke , not a bomb threat ) .
People like us are tired of no longer being able to hang out with our family until boarding the plane because they ca n't get past the security station without boarding passes .
People like us are tired of not being able to carry a bottle of water through the security x-ray machine , but high-energy lithium ion batteries with our laptops are fine .
And no , that last one was not a suggestion to prohibit laptops on airplanes .
It 's to just fucking let me have my liquids.In other words , I do not expect every single wrongdoer to be caught before he performs his evil actions .
That 's completely fucking unrealistic .
In fact , we 're already way past the point of diminishing returns .
For every 0.01 \ % extra safety you get , you 're giving up a lot of your rights .
Fuck...that. I 'd rather not be that 0.01 \ % safer.the real world effect of ubiquitous cameras is its use AGAINST the state .
understand you orwell parrotting pseudointellectual twits ? We do n't want nor need the government with those cameras for that purpose .
We have people with cell phone cameras , and that 's enough .
Except of course , that you 're not allowed to do that [ amnesty.org.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are also complaining that the christmas crotch bomber was not caught.
damned if you do, damned if you don'tUh...no.
Those complaining about this are generally people like me.
The ones who know the underwear bomber was a moron who fucking succeed in his plot, as in, managed to get the explosive in the plane AND managed to light them.
And the only one he managed to harm was himself, as he set his pants on fire.That's what we're fighting idiots.
That's what we're inconveniencing massive amounts of people and spending so much money on.
Sure, every once in a while, people manage to be successful.
It's far more likely that you're going to die in an armed robbery at your nearest gas station.
Why don't you make the gas-stations super-secure?Reasonable people are the ones who are willing to pay the price for the eventual terrorist now and then who is successful, because that is far better than the authority arresting every single moron making a dumbass joke online (sure, it wasn't funny, he's a moron, but the intention was a joke, not a bomb threat).
People like us are tired of no longer being able to hang out with our family until boarding the plane because they can't get past the security station without boarding passes.
People like us are tired of not being able to carry a bottle of water through the security x-ray machine, but high-energy lithium ion batteries with our laptops are fine.
And no, that last one was not a suggestion to prohibit laptops on airplanes.
It's to just fucking let me have my liquids.In other words, I do not expect every single wrongdoer to be caught before he performs his evil actions.
That's completely fucking unrealistic.
In fact, we're already way past the point of diminishing returns.
For every 0.01\% extra safety you get, you're giving up a lot of your rights.
Fuck...that.  I'd rather not be that 0.01\% safer.the real world effect of ubiquitous cameras is its use AGAINST the state.
understand you orwell parrotting pseudointellectual twits?We don't want nor need the government with those cameras for that purpose.
We have people with cell phone cameras, and that's enough.
Except of course, that you're not allowed to do that [amnesty.org.uk] 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30812362</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263808080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I were the police, given the current climate where you can't win for trying, I'd always take the safer route. If you don't investigate seemingly nonsensical threats and it turns out to be something, you get lambasted and lose your job. If you do and it turns out to be nothing, you get lambasted and lose your job. Therefore, I'll take the safer route knowing I'll get lambasted and lose my job either way. How many times has someone gone of the deep end and started shooting and we've looked back as a society and said "all the signs were there"? Sarcasm and cynicism don't exactly come through in plain text.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were the police , given the current climate where you ca n't win for trying , I 'd always take the safer route .
If you do n't investigate seemingly nonsensical threats and it turns out to be something , you get lambasted and lose your job .
If you do and it turns out to be nothing , you get lambasted and lose your job .
Therefore , I 'll take the safer route knowing I 'll get lambasted and lose my job either way .
How many times has someone gone of the deep end and started shooting and we 've looked back as a society and said " all the signs were there " ?
Sarcasm and cynicism do n't exactly come through in plain text .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I were the police, given the current climate where you can't win for trying, I'd always take the safer route.
If you don't investigate seemingly nonsensical threats and it turns out to be something, you get lambasted and lose your job.
If you do and it turns out to be nothing, you get lambasted and lose your job.
Therefore, I'll take the safer route knowing I'll get lambasted and lose my job either way.
How many times has someone gone of the deep end and started shooting and we've looked back as a society and said "all the signs were there"?
Sarcasm and cynicism don't exactly come through in plain text.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30817318</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263896160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, Britain is pretty depressing these days. Having taken part in the march of 2 million against the war (which is still going on with no end, even though the original reasons for it have been shown to have no basis at all), seen my wife arrested as a terrorist (baseless accusations, of course) and rights in general eroded... we left the UK. Best thing ever to have done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , Britain is pretty depressing these days .
Having taken part in the march of 2 million against the war ( which is still going on with no end , even though the original reasons for it have been shown to have no basis at all ) , seen my wife arrested as a terrorist ( baseless accusations , of course ) and rights in general eroded... we left the UK .
Best thing ever to have done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, Britain is pretty depressing these days.
Having taken part in the march of 2 million against the war (which is still going on with no end, even though the original reasons for it have been shown to have no basis at all), seen my wife arrested as a terrorist (baseless accusations, of course) and rights in general eroded... we left the UK.
Best thing ever to have done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808230</id>
	<title>possible explanation</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1263831780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The UK police probably paid a boatload of money for some kind of useless social network mining or monitoring software/service based on hype.  They guy who wasted the money is probably getting cold feet and they are now trying to justify the purchase with some trumped up charges.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The UK police probably paid a boatload of money for some kind of useless social network mining or monitoring software/service based on hype .
They guy who wasted the money is probably getting cold feet and they are now trying to justify the purchase with some trumped up charges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UK police probably paid a boatload of money for some kind of useless social network mining or monitoring software/service based on hype.
They guy who wasted the money is probably getting cold feet and they are now trying to justify the purchase with some trumped up charges.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806680</id>
	<title>Obvious solution</title>
	<author>nicc777</author>
	<datestamp>1263821460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Everybody should start tweeting similar messages. What are they going to do? Arrest 100 million people? I think not...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody should start tweeting similar messages .
What are they going to do ?
Arrest 100 million people ?
I think not.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody should start tweeting similar messages.
What are they going to do?
Arrest 100 million people?
I think not...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806546</id>
	<title>in ohio we call this the dummie tax</title>
	<author>cedarhillbilly</author>
	<datestamp>1263819540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>duh, what are you thinking?</htmltext>
<tokenext>duh , what are you thinking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>duh, what are you thinking?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30812858</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263810660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So why aren't authorities looking at the WHOLE PICTURE before reacting?</p></div><p>Because if the authorities were to look at the WHOLE PICTURE for every single suspicion on record,</p><p>1) They'd be up against privacy violations<br>2) They'd currently have a backlog of cases going back to 2002 and wouldn't have ANY PICTURE that is timely enough to make a difference.</p><p>In order to get their jobs done, the police have to take shortcuts.  The fact that so few incidents are reported shows that in general, their shortcuts are effective.  Cases like this show that workflow and policy still need improvement (eg: internet-related issues should be vetted by someone knowledgeable before going to the local beat, just like with other specialized issues)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So why are n't authorities looking at the WHOLE PICTURE before reacting ? Because if the authorities were to look at the WHOLE PICTURE for every single suspicion on record,1 ) They 'd be up against privacy violations2 ) They 'd currently have a backlog of cases going back to 2002 and would n't have ANY PICTURE that is timely enough to make a difference.In order to get their jobs done , the police have to take shortcuts .
The fact that so few incidents are reported shows that in general , their shortcuts are effective .
Cases like this show that workflow and policy still need improvement ( eg : internet-related issues should be vetted by someone knowledgeable before going to the local beat , just like with other specialized issues )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why aren't authorities looking at the WHOLE PICTURE before reacting?Because if the authorities were to look at the WHOLE PICTURE for every single suspicion on record,1) They'd be up against privacy violations2) They'd currently have a backlog of cases going back to 2002 and wouldn't have ANY PICTURE that is timely enough to make a difference.In order to get their jobs done, the police have to take shortcuts.
The fact that so few incidents are reported shows that in general, their shortcuts are effective.
Cases like this show that workflow and policy still need improvement (eg: internet-related issues should be vetted by someone knowledgeable before going to the local beat, just like with other specialized issues)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806556</id>
	<title>Sounds like...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263819780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like what happened to $cientology protestor Keith Henson who made a joke about a "Tom Cruise Missile", and was arrested, tried, and convicted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like what happened to $ cientology protestor Keith Henson who made a joke about a " Tom Cruise Missile " , and was arrested , tried , and convicted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like what happened to $cientology protestor Keith Henson who made a joke about a "Tom Cruise Missile", and was arrested, tried, and convicted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806378</id>
	<title>Re:idiot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This tweet was intended to be read by the guy's friends.</p><p>That police performs search all tweets for potential terrorist is already quite disturbing. Anyway, we can imagine this is a way to gather information on actual extremist group, at least amateur ones. And reading public information doesn't require a warrant.</p><p>But they should be able to understand context of such a message. If not, I afraid they can not catch real threats efficiently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This tweet was intended to be read by the guy 's friends.That police performs search all tweets for potential terrorist is already quite disturbing .
Anyway , we can imagine this is a way to gather information on actual extremist group , at least amateur ones .
And reading public information does n't require a warrant.But they should be able to understand context of such a message .
If not , I afraid they can not catch real threats efficiently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This tweet was intended to be read by the guy's friends.That police performs search all tweets for potential terrorist is already quite disturbing.
Anyway, we can imagine this is a way to gather information on actual extremist group, at least amateur ones.
And reading public information doesn't require a warrant.But they should be able to understand context of such a message.
If not, I afraid they can not catch real threats efficiently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806036</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263813300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties. I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it. Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.</p></div><p>Even when the Conservatives are elected, the tabloids will still be in power.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties .
I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they 're in power but I doubt it .
Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.Even when the Conservatives are elected , the tabloids will still be in power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties.
I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it.
Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.Even when the Conservatives are elected, the tabloids will still be in power.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806364</id>
	<title>Some world...</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1263817560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where, if you make a joke of killing thousands of people, that's ok, but god help you if you call somebody a chink or a honkey or a nigger, that's really the threat to society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where , if you make a joke of killing thousands of people , that 's ok , but god help you if you call somebody a chink or a honkey or a nigger , that 's really the threat to society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where, if you make a joke of killing thousands of people, that's ok, but god help you if you call somebody a chink or a honkey or a nigger, that's really the threat to society.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809950</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>The Archon V2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1263840000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We don't want to get slashdot in trouble.</p></div><p>+5 funny? Dude, you are the bomb! You killed all of Slashdot!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't want to get slashdot in trouble. + 5 funny ?
Dude , you are the bomb !
You killed all of Slashdot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't want to get slashdot in trouble.+5 funny?
Dude, you are the bomb!
You killed all of Slashdot!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809060</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1263836220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ?
<br> <br>
Maybe they got confused because his "joke" failed to be even the slightest bit funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ?
Maybe they got confused because his " joke " failed to be even the slightest bit funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ?
Maybe they got confused because his "joke" failed to be even the slightest bit funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805944</id>
	<title>This happens weekly</title>
	<author>sciencewatcher</author>
	<datestamp>1263812160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This happens about every other week on an airport somewhere. It will still take some time but gradually more and more people learn not to make such jokes or use such language. Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language. There once were times (in the nineties) when there were no guns at airport. Now all airports have military style weapons to greet their travellers. Just adopt to the environment a bit more quickly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This happens about every other week on an airport somewhere .
It will still take some time but gradually more and more people learn not to make such jokes or use such language .
Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language .
There once were times ( in the nineties ) when there were no guns at airport .
Now all airports have military style weapons to greet their travellers .
Just adopt to the environment a bit more quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This happens about every other week on an airport somewhere.
It will still take some time but gradually more and more people learn not to make such jokes or use such language.
Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language.
There once were times (in the nineties) when there were no guns at airport.
Now all airports have military style weapons to greet their travellers.
Just adopt to the environment a bit more quickly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809002</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263835920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe he should have added &lsquo;lol&rsquo;, &lsquo;jk&rsquo;, or &lsquo;;)&rsquo; at the end of the twitter to give it a sarcastic/joking context?  Then maybe the police would have ignored it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe he should have added    lol    ,    jk    , or    ; )    at the end of the twitter to give it a sarcastic/joking context ?
Then maybe the police would have ignored it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe he should have added ‘lol’, ‘jk’, or ‘;)’ at the end of the twitter to give it a sarcastic/joking context?
Then maybe the police would have ignored it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807048</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1263824280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You can have (consensual) kinky sex, but if you video it, you're a sex offender.</i></p><p>Apparently there is an exception to the violent porn law that you're clearly thinking of to allow being in the film as a defence. You do have to be clearly visible and recognisable however.</p><p>Of course, that probably isn't a defence if you give/sell it to your mates, or for them.</p><p>It's also a little more targeted than just "kinky", no-one's going to be dragged through court because of a little whipped cream. I deplore this particular law as much as anyone, but overstating its reach like this doesn't help anyone.</p><p><i>Being held 30 days without charge? Not enough! We must change the law to make it 90 days! After all, you wouldn't have been arrested it you weren't guilty! </i></p><p>Again, you're misrepresenting that. I don't agree with it either, but the justification was to give the police/security services time to take action against the rest of the terrorist cell/organisation that you're allegedly part of.</p><p><i>Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq? That'll be declared illegal and you'll be arrested on public decency charges. </i></p><p><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8453560.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">Rubbish</a> [bbc.co.uk]. The ban on Islam4UK may have been prompted by the public outcry over the planned march, but (assuming you believe the BBC) it was done in order to close a loophole - the group had already been banned under other names. I've also missed reports of people being arrested only for protesting against soldiers, though there have certainly been calls for it from the tabloids.</p><p><i>I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it. Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.</i></p><p>Given the tabloids are either in favour of or actively campaigned for most of the things you talk about, you're right; any government that took a much-needed hatchet to these and similar laws would most likely be out at the following election.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can have ( consensual ) kinky sex , but if you video it , you 're a sex offender.Apparently there is an exception to the violent porn law that you 're clearly thinking of to allow being in the film as a defence .
You do have to be clearly visible and recognisable however.Of course , that probably is n't a defence if you give/sell it to your mates , or for them.It 's also a little more targeted than just " kinky " , no-one 's going to be dragged through court because of a little whipped cream .
I deplore this particular law as much as anyone , but overstating its reach like this does n't help anyone.Being held 30 days without charge ?
Not enough !
We must change the law to make it 90 days !
After all , you would n't have been arrested it you were n't guilty !
Again , you 're misrepresenting that .
I do n't agree with it either , but the justification was to give the police/security services time to take action against the rest of the terrorist cell/organisation that you 're allegedly part of.Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq ?
That 'll be declared illegal and you 'll be arrested on public decency charges .
Rubbish [ bbc.co.uk ] .
The ban on Islam4UK may have been prompted by the public outcry over the planned march , but ( assuming you believe the BBC ) it was done in order to close a loophole - the group had already been banned under other names .
I 've also missed reports of people being arrested only for protesting against soldiers , though there have certainly been calls for it from the tabloids.I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they 're in power but I doubt it .
Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.Given the tabloids are either in favour of or actively campaigned for most of the things you talk about , you 're right ; any government that took a much-needed hatchet to these and similar laws would most likely be out at the following election .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can have (consensual) kinky sex, but if you video it, you're a sex offender.Apparently there is an exception to the violent porn law that you're clearly thinking of to allow being in the film as a defence.
You do have to be clearly visible and recognisable however.Of course, that probably isn't a defence if you give/sell it to your mates, or for them.It's also a little more targeted than just "kinky", no-one's going to be dragged through court because of a little whipped cream.
I deplore this particular law as much as anyone, but overstating its reach like this doesn't help anyone.Being held 30 days without charge?
Not enough!
We must change the law to make it 90 days!
After all, you wouldn't have been arrested it you weren't guilty!
Again, you're misrepresenting that.
I don't agree with it either, but the justification was to give the police/security services time to take action against the rest of the terrorist cell/organisation that you're allegedly part of.Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq?
That'll be declared illegal and you'll be arrested on public decency charges.
Rubbish [bbc.co.uk].
The ban on Islam4UK may have been prompted by the public outcry over the planned march, but (assuming you believe the BBC) it was done in order to close a loophole - the group had already been banned under other names.
I've also missed reports of people being arrested only for protesting against soldiers, though there have certainly been calls for it from the tabloids.I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it.
Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.Given the tabloids are either in favour of or actively campaigned for most of the things you talk about, you're right; any government that took a much-needed hatchet to these and similar laws would most likely be out at the following election.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807124</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1263825000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know your just an ugly troll full of pre-judice and hate because you need someone to blame for a worthless life spent masterbating to underwear catalogs in your parents basement, but I'll bite anyway.
<br> <br>
Nah just a joking, I'm not going to bite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know your just an ugly troll full of pre-judice and hate because you need someone to blame for a worthless life spent masterbating to underwear catalogs in your parents basement , but I 'll bite anyway .
Nah just a joking , I 'm not going to bite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know your just an ugly troll full of pre-judice and hate because you need someone to blame for a worthless life spent masterbating to underwear catalogs in your parents basement, but I'll bite anyway.
Nah just a joking, I'm not going to bite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263814800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Britain hasn't had the best reputation in history. Should this kind of thing surprise us? What are the odds of Britain having a revolution?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Britain has n't had the best reputation in history .
Should this kind of thing surprise us ?
What are the odds of Britain having a revolution ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Britain hasn't had the best reputation in history.
Should this kind of thing surprise us?
What are the odds of Britain having a revolution?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808138</id>
	<title>360 stupidity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263831240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a dumb shit. By the same token, an actual terrorist wouldn't advertise the fact he was going to blow up an airport on Twitter.</p><p>The police were just doing their job though. If someone did advertise that they felt like blowing up an airport on twitter, then actually blew it up, I wonder what we'd be saying about the police then if they didn't haul the guy in despite the fact that the twitter post had been reported to them. The police are damned if they do and damned if they don't.</p><p>A guy named David summed it up nicely:<br>"The terrorists have won. We are now afraid of our own shadow."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a dumb shit .
By the same token , an actual terrorist would n't advertise the fact he was going to blow up an airport on Twitter.The police were just doing their job though .
If someone did advertise that they felt like blowing up an airport on twitter , then actually blew it up , I wonder what we 'd be saying about the police then if they did n't haul the guy in despite the fact that the twitter post had been reported to them .
The police are damned if they do and damned if they do n't.A guy named David summed it up nicely : " The terrorists have won .
We are now afraid of our own shadow .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a dumb shit.
By the same token, an actual terrorist wouldn't advertise the fact he was going to blow up an airport on Twitter.The police were just doing their job though.
If someone did advertise that they felt like blowing up an airport on twitter, then actually blew it up, I wonder what we'd be saying about the police then if they didn't haul the guy in despite the fact that the twitter post had been reported to them.
The police are damned if they do and damned if they don't.A guy named David summed it up nicely:"The terrorists have won.
We are now afraid of our own shadow.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807214</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1263825720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a long while, the police in the UK has been set targets for number of arrests/convictions, number of crimes within certain categories and other such targets.</p><p>The natural change of the behaviour of the police officers as a followup of these targets was:<br>- The police started arresting people for things that previously were dealth with informally, for example, if a kid throws a stone and breaks a glass window he can now end in court: in the past, the local copper would typically have a serious talk with him, take him to his parents, get them to pay for repairs and that was it.<br>- The police started pushing people to accept "Cautions" which are a formal admission of guild for minor crimes which does not require going to Court: this does create a Criminal Record for a person which might very well ruin their lives (for example, a Nursing Student got one of those because she was drunk and misbehaving, which resulted in her not being able to find any work as a nurse since she now had a criminal record).<br>- The police started misreporting crimes (as being in a less serious category) or even avoiding reporting them altogether (I know of a at least one case where a bag was snatched from a baby-buggy which was left unattended and the police refused to file the case because "nobody saw the bag being taken from the baby-buggy, so how do we know you didn't lost it").</p><p>At the same time, the increased bureaucratic overhead of keeping track of all those targets meant more time behind the desk and less time on the beat of the cops.</p><p>This resulted in people loosing trust in the Police. The familiar, well-liked and trusted local "bob" (the police officer that does the rounds in a neighbourhood) that knew and was known by the people in his beat (usually having a "fair but firm" image) was replaced by a group of guys in uniform which don't know you and you don't know them, with most people not wanting to interact with unless they really have to (they way the law is now, they can pretty much arrest you for not being properly polite). The cops themselfs have become distant and distrusting in reaction - they adopted a Us vs Them mentality.</p><p>The cops were taken out of the community and the community was taken out of the cops.</p><p>Under this environment, is hardly surprising that most good people don't want to join the Police Force anymore: while<br>in the past police officers were respected and trusted as wise users of the power they had (mostly prefering persuasion rather than force), nowadays they're mostly feared, distrusted and disliked.</p><p>The sad bit is that the old soft target of "making people fell safe" was much better than whatever hard targets they set for the police nowadays.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a long while , the police in the UK has been set targets for number of arrests/convictions , number of crimes within certain categories and other such targets.The natural change of the behaviour of the police officers as a followup of these targets was : - The police started arresting people for things that previously were dealth with informally , for example , if a kid throws a stone and breaks a glass window he can now end in court : in the past , the local copper would typically have a serious talk with him , take him to his parents , get them to pay for repairs and that was it.- The police started pushing people to accept " Cautions " which are a formal admission of guild for minor crimes which does not require going to Court : this does create a Criminal Record for a person which might very well ruin their lives ( for example , a Nursing Student got one of those because she was drunk and misbehaving , which resulted in her not being able to find any work as a nurse since she now had a criminal record ) .- The police started misreporting crimes ( as being in a less serious category ) or even avoiding reporting them altogether ( I know of a at least one case where a bag was snatched from a baby-buggy which was left unattended and the police refused to file the case because " nobody saw the bag being taken from the baby-buggy , so how do we know you did n't lost it " ) .At the same time , the increased bureaucratic overhead of keeping track of all those targets meant more time behind the desk and less time on the beat of the cops.This resulted in people loosing trust in the Police .
The familiar , well-liked and trusted local " bob " ( the police officer that does the rounds in a neighbourhood ) that knew and was known by the people in his beat ( usually having a " fair but firm " image ) was replaced by a group of guys in uniform which do n't know you and you do n't know them , with most people not wanting to interact with unless they really have to ( they way the law is now , they can pretty much arrest you for not being properly polite ) .
The cops themselfs have become distant and distrusting in reaction - they adopted a Us vs Them mentality.The cops were taken out of the community and the community was taken out of the cops.Under this environment , is hardly surprising that most good people do n't want to join the Police Force anymore : whilein the past police officers were respected and trusted as wise users of the power they had ( mostly prefering persuasion rather than force ) , nowadays they 're mostly feared , distrusted and disliked.The sad bit is that the old soft target of " making people fell safe " was much better than whatever hard targets they set for the police nowadays .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a long while, the police in the UK has been set targets for number of arrests/convictions, number of crimes within certain categories and other such targets.The natural change of the behaviour of the police officers as a followup of these targets was:- The police started arresting people for things that previously were dealth with informally, for example, if a kid throws a stone and breaks a glass window he can now end in court: in the past, the local copper would typically have a serious talk with him, take him to his parents, get them to pay for repairs and that was it.- The police started pushing people to accept "Cautions" which are a formal admission of guild for minor crimes which does not require going to Court: this does create a Criminal Record for a person which might very well ruin their lives (for example, a Nursing Student got one of those because she was drunk and misbehaving, which resulted in her not being able to find any work as a nurse since she now had a criminal record).- The police started misreporting crimes (as being in a less serious category) or even avoiding reporting them altogether (I know of a at least one case where a bag was snatched from a baby-buggy which was left unattended and the police refused to file the case because "nobody saw the bag being taken from the baby-buggy, so how do we know you didn't lost it").At the same time, the increased bureaucratic overhead of keeping track of all those targets meant more time behind the desk and less time on the beat of the cops.This resulted in people loosing trust in the Police.
The familiar, well-liked and trusted local "bob" (the police officer that does the rounds in a neighbourhood) that knew and was known by the people in his beat (usually having a "fair but firm" image) was replaced by a group of guys in uniform which don't know you and you don't know them, with most people not wanting to interact with unless they really have to (they way the law is now, they can pretty much arrest you for not being properly polite).
The cops themselfs have become distant and distrusting in reaction - they adopted a Us vs Them mentality.The cops were taken out of the community and the community was taken out of the cops.Under this environment, is hardly surprising that most good people don't want to join the Police Force anymore: whilein the past police officers were respected and trusted as wise users of the power they had (mostly prefering persuasion rather than force), nowadays they're mostly feared, distrusted and disliked.The sad bit is that the old soft target of "making people fell safe" was much better than whatever hard targets they set for the police nowadays.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807532</id>
	<title>everyone here complaining about this</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1263828120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are also complaining that the christmas crotch bomber was not caught. damned if you do, damned if you don't</p><p>the moron made bomb threats at the airport on a social networking site. please explain to me exactly how this is orwellian, intrusive, yro, or any other pseudo-intellectual reference you cling to other than simple common fucking sense: don't make fucking bomb threats at the fucking airport</p><p>or you will, and should, be arrested. what exactly is so controversial or shocking about this to you? it seems like a slam dunk to me</p><p>he didn't use putty to rearrange files on his private server from his iphone, HE POSTED ON TWITTER. you know, public fucking feed? do you understand that any of you pseudo-intellectual twits whining about orwell?</p><p>btw the use of the word "orwellian" has become so knee-jerk here it is no longer a signifier for thoughtfulness any more, but a replacement for thought. that particular fantasy's sell-by date passed away sometime in the cold war. please update your literary references. parrotting ORWELL" *cough* "ORWELL" every fucking time yro comes up that at this point it only makes you look like a vaguely functioning junior high school student. now if you mention LITTLE brother: every kid with a cell phone camera RECORDING THE ABUSES OF THE POLICE (how's that for a twist?), then you've impressed me with an updated modern intellectual repertoire. i want to hear less "orwell", more "rodney king":</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney\_King" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney\_King</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>the real world effect of ubiquitous cameras is its use AGAINST the state. understand you orwell parrotting pseudointellectual twits?</p><p>all of you please shut the fuck up about the EXTREMELY outdated fantasy of orwell, thanks. you don't look intelligent anymore, you look very outdated</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are also complaining that the christmas crotch bomber was not caught .
damned if you do , damned if you don'tthe moron made bomb threats at the airport on a social networking site .
please explain to me exactly how this is orwellian , intrusive , yro , or any other pseudo-intellectual reference you cling to other than simple common fucking sense : do n't make fucking bomb threats at the fucking airportor you will , and should , be arrested .
what exactly is so controversial or shocking about this to you ?
it seems like a slam dunk to mehe did n't use putty to rearrange files on his private server from his iphone , HE POSTED ON TWITTER .
you know , public fucking feed ?
do you understand that any of you pseudo-intellectual twits whining about orwell ? btw the use of the word " orwellian " has become so knee-jerk here it is no longer a signifier for thoughtfulness any more , but a replacement for thought .
that particular fantasy 's sell-by date passed away sometime in the cold war .
please update your literary references .
parrotting ORWELL " * cough * " ORWELL " every fucking time yro comes up that at this point it only makes you look like a vaguely functioning junior high school student .
now if you mention LITTLE brother : every kid with a cell phone camera RECORDING THE ABUSES OF THE POLICE ( how 's that for a twist ?
) , then you 've impressed me with an updated modern intellectual repertoire .
i want to hear less " orwell " , more " rodney king " : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney \ _King [ wikipedia.org ] the real world effect of ubiquitous cameras is its use AGAINST the state .
understand you orwell parrotting pseudointellectual twits ? all of you please shut the fuck up about the EXTREMELY outdated fantasy of orwell , thanks .
you do n't look intelligent anymore , you look very outdated</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are also complaining that the christmas crotch bomber was not caught.
damned if you do, damned if you don'tthe moron made bomb threats at the airport on a social networking site.
please explain to me exactly how this is orwellian, intrusive, yro, or any other pseudo-intellectual reference you cling to other than simple common fucking sense: don't make fucking bomb threats at the fucking airportor you will, and should, be arrested.
what exactly is so controversial or shocking about this to you?
it seems like a slam dunk to mehe didn't use putty to rearrange files on his private server from his iphone, HE POSTED ON TWITTER.
you know, public fucking feed?
do you understand that any of you pseudo-intellectual twits whining about orwell?btw the use of the word "orwellian" has become so knee-jerk here it is no longer a signifier for thoughtfulness any more, but a replacement for thought.
that particular fantasy's sell-by date passed away sometime in the cold war.
please update your literary references.
parrotting ORWELL" *cough* "ORWELL" every fucking time yro comes up that at this point it only makes you look like a vaguely functioning junior high school student.
now if you mention LITTLE brother: every kid with a cell phone camera RECORDING THE ABUSES OF THE POLICE (how's that for a twist?
), then you've impressed me with an updated modern intellectual repertoire.
i want to hear less "orwell", more "rodney king":http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney\_King [wikipedia.org]the real world effect of ubiquitous cameras is its use AGAINST the state.
understand you orwell parrotting pseudointellectual twits?all of you please shut the fuck up about the EXTREMELY outdated fantasy of orwell, thanks.
you don't look intelligent anymore, you look very outdated</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807056</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263824340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean, I'm sure you once shouted something akin to "I'm gonna kill you" to some drunk idiot on a Saturday night. Not a nice thing to say, granted but that doesn't make you immediately want to kill that person.</p></div><p>In my opinion threats must be taken as seriously as the act itself. If you say "I'm gonna kill you," I don't think you deserve a life sentence but six months in prison would be warranted. That'll give you an opportunity to practice self-restraint.</p><p>Lots of people live in constant fear because their lives have been threatened, even if the threat is a joke. And we know that many times the threats are real. Spouses are killed despite restraining orders and pleas to the police for protection.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , I 'm sure you once shouted something akin to " I 'm gon na kill you " to some drunk idiot on a Saturday night .
Not a nice thing to say , granted but that does n't make you immediately want to kill that person.In my opinion threats must be taken as seriously as the act itself .
If you say " I 'm gon na kill you , " I do n't think you deserve a life sentence but six months in prison would be warranted .
That 'll give you an opportunity to practice self-restraint.Lots of people live in constant fear because their lives have been threatened , even if the threat is a joke .
And we know that many times the threats are real .
Spouses are killed despite restraining orders and pleas to the police for protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, I'm sure you once shouted something akin to "I'm gonna kill you" to some drunk idiot on a Saturday night.
Not a nice thing to say, granted but that doesn't make you immediately want to kill that person.In my opinion threats must be taken as seriously as the act itself.
If you say "I'm gonna kill you," I don't think you deserve a life sentence but six months in prison would be warranted.
That'll give you an opportunity to practice self-restraint.Lots of people live in constant fear because their lives have been threatened, even if the threat is a joke.
And we know that many times the threats are real.
Spouses are killed despite restraining orders and pleas to the police for protection.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263822060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's been UK police policy for at least two decades that all threats of violence (including threatening to kill one person, it doesn't have to be terror related) are investigated.  If someone says he's going to 'blow an airport sky high' in casual conversation, then that's one thing.  If he broadcasts this to the world, then it's another.  His post could have been a joke, or it could have been a crazy person who actually meant it.  It's the job of the police to check which it is, and that may include arresting him.  </p><p>
It's fun to play the overreacting police card, and it's not like there's a shortage of cases where that's exactly what's happened, but I don't really have any sympathy for people who make bomb threats and are surprised when they get arrested.  Twitter may be a relatively new technology, but from the perspective of the police this is no different from phoning up a TV or radio station and saying that you're going to blow up the airport.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been UK police policy for at least two decades that all threats of violence ( including threatening to kill one person , it does n't have to be terror related ) are investigated .
If someone says he 's going to 'blow an airport sky high ' in casual conversation , then that 's one thing .
If he broadcasts this to the world , then it 's another .
His post could have been a joke , or it could have been a crazy person who actually meant it .
It 's the job of the police to check which it is , and that may include arresting him .
It 's fun to play the overreacting police card , and it 's not like there 's a shortage of cases where that 's exactly what 's happened , but I do n't really have any sympathy for people who make bomb threats and are surprised when they get arrested .
Twitter may be a relatively new technology , but from the perspective of the police this is no different from phoning up a TV or radio station and saying that you 're going to blow up the airport .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been UK police policy for at least two decades that all threats of violence (including threatening to kill one person, it doesn't have to be terror related) are investigated.
If someone says he's going to 'blow an airport sky high' in casual conversation, then that's one thing.
If he broadcasts this to the world, then it's another.
His post could have been a joke, or it could have been a crazy person who actually meant it.
It's the job of the police to check which it is, and that may include arresting him.
It's fun to play the overreacting police card, and it's not like there's a shortage of cases where that's exactly what's happened, but I don't really have any sympathy for people who make bomb threats and are surprised when they get arrested.
Twitter may be a relatively new technology, but from the perspective of the police this is no different from phoning up a TV or radio station and saying that you're going to blow up the airport.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810948</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Uranium-238</author>
	<datestamp>1263844800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wasn't saying I agreed with the Police, just saying that if you make any sort of joke/threat you will be arrested. Like if I say to my wife "Honey if you don't hurry the fuck up I'm going to kill you!" you will be arrested even if you're not being serious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was n't saying I agreed with the Police , just saying that if you make any sort of joke/threat you will be arrested .
Like if I say to my wife " Honey if you do n't hurry the fuck up I 'm going to kill you !
" you will be arrested even if you 're not being serious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wasn't saying I agreed with the Police, just saying that if you make any sort of joke/threat you will be arrested.
Like if I say to my wife "Honey if you don't hurry the fuck up I'm going to kill you!
" you will be arrested even if you're not being serious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806662</id>
	<title>Orwellian thought crime?</title>
	<author>Seismologist</author>
	<datestamp>1263821280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This pretty much sums it up for me from TFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>The civil libertarian Tessa Mayes, an expert on privacy law and free speech issues, said: "Making jokes about terrorism is considered a thought crime, mistakenly seen as a real act of harm or intention to commit harm.

"The police's actions seem laughable and suggest desperation in their efforts to combat terrorism, yet they have serious repercussions for all of us. In a democracy, our right to say what we please to each other should be non-negotiable, even on Twitter."</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This pretty much sums it up for me from TFA : The civil libertarian Tessa Mayes , an expert on privacy law and free speech issues , said : " Making jokes about terrorism is considered a thought crime , mistakenly seen as a real act of harm or intention to commit harm .
" The police 's actions seem laughable and suggest desperation in their efforts to combat terrorism , yet they have serious repercussions for all of us .
In a democracy , our right to say what we please to each other should be non-negotiable , even on Twitter .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This pretty much sums it up for me from TFA:The civil libertarian Tessa Mayes, an expert on privacy law and free speech issues, said: "Making jokes about terrorism is considered a thought crime, mistakenly seen as a real act of harm or intention to commit harm.
"The police's actions seem laughable and suggest desperation in their efforts to combat terrorism, yet they have serious repercussions for all of us.
In a democracy, our right to say what we please to each other should be non-negotiable, even on Twitter.
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811576</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>HeronBlademaster</author>
	<datestamp>1263847740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They quickly saw there was nothing to it.</p></div><p>TFA says he was suspended from work <i>and</i> banned from the airport in question, so apparently, at least two "they"s thought there was something to it.</p><p>Furthermore, he was only let out on bail, rather than set free, so clearly the police are pursuing an investigation.  They have given no indication whatsoever that they have realized there's "nothing to it".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They quickly saw there was nothing to it.TFA says he was suspended from work and banned from the airport in question , so apparently , at least two " they " s thought there was something to it.Furthermore , he was only let out on bail , rather than set free , so clearly the police are pursuing an investigation .
They have given no indication whatsoever that they have realized there 's " nothing to it " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They quickly saw there was nothing to it.TFA says he was suspended from work and banned from the airport in question, so apparently, at least two "they"s thought there was something to it.Furthermore, he was only let out on bail, rather than set free, so clearly the police are pursuing an investigation.
They have given no indication whatsoever that they have realized there's "nothing to it".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807780</id>
	<title>Re:I see another headline . . .</title>
	<author>Nexus7</author>
	<datestamp>1263829380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did they send a joke arrest tweet, or did they arrest him in meat-space?</p><p>BTW, tweet, or twit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did they send a joke arrest tweet , or did they arrest him in meat-space ? BTW , tweet , or twit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did they send a joke arrest tweet, or did they arrest him in meat-space?BTW, tweet, or twit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807066</id>
	<title>Re:Living in fear</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1263824460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go to the garage and blow them up.<br> <br>
Are you suggesting that this guy was actually taking about reinflating Robin Hood airport?  From the context, he was talking about using explosives to destroy the place.  Yes, it was a joke but the meaning was exactly what they claim.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go to the garage and blow them up .
Are you suggesting that this guy was actually taking about reinflating Robin Hood airport ?
From the context , he was talking about using explosives to destroy the place .
Yes , it was a joke but the meaning was exactly what they claim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go to the garage and blow them up.
Are you suggesting that this guy was actually taking about reinflating Robin Hood airport?
From the context, he was talking about using explosives to destroy the place.
Yes, it was a joke but the meaning was exactly what they claim.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806686</id>
	<title>What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263821520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Under the terrorism legislation in almost every country there is no requirement for proof or evidence to detain, question, arrest, and charge an individual the Government deems a threat. However, unlike the anti-gangsterism law the terrorism act is invoked on a daily basis. Security Theatre as defined by Bruce Schneier has now replaced Masterpiece Theatre once hosted by Alistair Cooke on PBS in the USofA.</p><p>Please send your donations to "The Government" so they can protect you from terrorists and you will receive a "War on Terror" coffee mug as a token of appreciation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Under the terrorism legislation in almost every country there is no requirement for proof or evidence to detain , question , arrest , and charge an individual the Government deems a threat .
However , unlike the anti-gangsterism law the terrorism act is invoked on a daily basis .
Security Theatre as defined by Bruce Schneier has now replaced Masterpiece Theatre once hosted by Alistair Cooke on PBS in the USofA.Please send your donations to " The Government " so they can protect you from terrorists and you will receive a " War on Terror " coffee mug as a token of appreciation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under the terrorism legislation in almost every country there is no requirement for proof or evidence to detain, question, arrest, and charge an individual the Government deems a threat.
However, unlike the anti-gangsterism law the terrorism act is invoked on a daily basis.
Security Theatre as defined by Bruce Schneier has now replaced Masterpiece Theatre once hosted by Alistair Cooke on PBS in the USofA.Please send your donations to "The Government" so they can protect you from terrorists and you will receive a "War on Terror" coffee mug as a token of appreciation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806332</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>Odinlake</author>
	<datestamp>1263817140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How very, very sad. How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ? What a bunch of idiots. Not only the authorities but also the person who reported him.</p><p>It seems we're slowly moving to a state where only correct thinking is allowed. No joking, no sense of humour, irony or annoyance.</p></div><p>I can't remember ever having heard a funny threat. Ah well, maybe one involving panties - but definitely never of bombs. My humor seems to be acceptable in other areas, so I suppose it's just defective in this particular category. But seriously, any time I hear this kind of news story I just think "what an idiot", and feel no empathy whatsoever.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How very , very sad .
How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ?
What a bunch of idiots .
Not only the authorities but also the person who reported him.It seems we 're slowly moving to a state where only correct thinking is allowed .
No joking , no sense of humour , irony or annoyance.I ca n't remember ever having heard a funny threat .
Ah well , maybe one involving panties - but definitely never of bombs .
My humor seems to be acceptable in other areas , so I suppose it 's just defective in this particular category .
But seriously , any time I hear this kind of news story I just think " what an idiot " , and feel no empathy whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How very, very sad.
How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ?
What a bunch of idiots.
Not only the authorities but also the person who reported him.It seems we're slowly moving to a state where only correct thinking is allowed.
No joking, no sense of humour, irony or annoyance.I can't remember ever having heard a funny threat.
Ah well, maybe one involving panties - but definitely never of bombs.
My humor seems to be acceptable in other areas, so I suppose it's just defective in this particular category.
But seriously, any time I hear this kind of news story I just think "what an idiot", and feel no empathy whatsoever.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806494</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1263818880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"what happened to the Burden of Proof"</i>
<br> <br>
They haven't even charged the guy and your on about burden of proof? Do they have mobile courts in your country that follow the cops around, or do they just arrest people and sort it out later like everyone else? Cops the world over do not have to prove a damned thing to arrest you, all that is required of them is to follow the arrest procedure.
<br> <br>
<i>"in most western countries it's very rare for someone to be trialled for something they did not (yet) commit."</i>
<br> <br>
No it's not, you can be innocent and still stand trial, that's kinda the whole point of a trial. The crime he has <i>allegedly</i> commited is that of making a bomb threat, you don't actually have to blow something up to be found guilty of threatening to do so.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" what happened to the Burden of Proof " They have n't even charged the guy and your on about burden of proof ?
Do they have mobile courts in your country that follow the cops around , or do they just arrest people and sort it out later like everyone else ?
Cops the world over do not have to prove a damned thing to arrest you , all that is required of them is to follow the arrest procedure .
" in most western countries it 's very rare for someone to be trialled for something they did not ( yet ) commit .
" No it 's not , you can be innocent and still stand trial , that 's kinda the whole point of a trial .
The crime he has allegedly commited is that of making a bomb threat , you do n't actually have to blow something up to be found guilty of threatening to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"what happened to the Burden of Proof"
 
They haven't even charged the guy and your on about burden of proof?
Do they have mobile courts in your country that follow the cops around, or do they just arrest people and sort it out later like everyone else?
Cops the world over do not have to prove a damned thing to arrest you, all that is required of them is to follow the arrest procedure.
"in most western countries it's very rare for someone to be trialled for something they did not (yet) commit.
"
 
No it's not, you can be innocent and still stand trial, that's kinda the whole point of a trial.
The crime he has allegedly commited is that of making a bomb threat, you don't actually have to blow something up to be found guilty of threatening to do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806604</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1263820380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights. And if you were drunk and shouted "I'm going to kill you", you'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you.</p></div><p>
I think you are the one who is confused.
<br> <br>
From WP's entry on Assult: <i>"Assault is a crime of violence against another person. In some jurisdictions, including Australia and New Zealand, assault refers to an act that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence, while <b>in other jurisdictions, such as the United States, assault may refer only to the threat of violence</b> caused by an immediate show of force."</i>
<br> <br>
In other words, in the US patting your god given concealed weapon and saying "I'm going to kill you" is considered assult. I belive but am too lazy to prove that the UK uses the same definition of assult as AU/NZ, ie: you have to actually physically assult someone before it becomes a crime.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights .
And if you were drunk and shouted " I 'm going to kill you " , you 'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you .
I think you are the one who is confused .
From WP 's entry on Assult : " Assault is a crime of violence against another person .
In some jurisdictions , including Australia and New Zealand , assault refers to an act that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence , while in other jurisdictions , such as the United States , assault may refer only to the threat of violence caused by an immediate show of force .
" In other words , in the US patting your god given concealed weapon and saying " I 'm going to kill you " is considered assult .
I belive but am too lazy to prove that the UK uses the same definition of assult as AU/NZ , ie : you have to actually physically assult someone before it becomes a crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights.
And if you were drunk and shouted "I'm going to kill you", you'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you.
I think you are the one who is confused.
From WP's entry on Assult: "Assault is a crime of violence against another person.
In some jurisdictions, including Australia and New Zealand, assault refers to an act that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence, while in other jurisdictions, such as the United States, assault may refer only to the threat of violence caused by an immediate show of force.
"
 
In other words, in the US patting your god given concealed weapon and saying "I'm going to kill you" is considered assult.
I belive but am too lazy to prove that the UK uses the same definition of assult as AU/NZ, ie: you have to actually physically assult someone before it becomes a crime.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808702</id>
	<title>Re:idiot</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1263834600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except in some obvious actions by separatist groups, bomb threats are always fake. It is not "necessary" to respond to bomb threats anymore than it is necessary to scramble all air defenses when a UFO is reported.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except in some obvious actions by separatist groups , bomb threats are always fake .
It is not " necessary " to respond to bomb threats anymore than it is necessary to scramble all air defenses when a UFO is reported .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except in some obvious actions by separatist groups, bomb threats are always fake.
It is not "necessary" to respond to bomb threats anymore than it is necessary to scramble all air defenses when a UFO is reported.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806638</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263820860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq? That'll be declared illegal and you'll be arrested on public decency charges.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
If you mean the extremist Muslims who wanted to stage a protest more or less alongside the coffins of servicemen being brought home at Wootton Basset, I think it was largely done to protect them from the inevitable reaction to their crass stupidity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq ?
That 'll be declared illegal and you 'll be arrested on public decency charges .
If you mean the extremist Muslims who wanted to stage a protest more or less alongside the coffins of servicemen being brought home at Wootton Basset , I think it was largely done to protect them from the inevitable reaction to their crass stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq?
That'll be declared illegal and you'll be arrested on public decency charges.
If you mean the extremist Muslims who wanted to stage a protest more or less alongside the coffins of servicemen being brought home at Wootton Basset, I think it was largely done to protect them from the inevitable reaction to their crass stupidity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806218</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Xiph1980</author>
	<datestamp>1263815580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, I know the UK is legally in a sorry state at the moment, I can only hope that the next voting round will bring some relief for you lot there, or perhaps wait for the fifth of november<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br>
And about the drunk shout-outs, I actually meant that if a bloke near you is drunk, and very annoying and looking for a fight or whatever, and you in your frustration blurt out something like "I'm gonna cut your throat if you don't get the fuck away from me", so saying it sober, but in a state of severe frustration. Doesn't mean you'd mean it, or actually would be capable of doing that, so shouldn't be grounds for the police to arrest you. Perhaps warn you and say something along the lines of "That's not a very nice thing to say, watch your language" but that should be it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I know the UK is legally in a sorry state at the moment , I can only hope that the next voting round will bring some relief for you lot there , or perhaps wait for the fifth of november : ) And about the drunk shout-outs , I actually meant that if a bloke near you is drunk , and very annoying and looking for a fight or whatever , and you in your frustration blurt out something like " I 'm gon na cut your throat if you do n't get the fuck away from me " , so saying it sober , but in a state of severe frustration .
Does n't mean you 'd mean it , or actually would be capable of doing that , so should n't be grounds for the police to arrest you .
Perhaps warn you and say something along the lines of " That 's not a very nice thing to say , watch your language " but that should be it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I know the UK is legally in a sorry state at the moment, I can only hope that the next voting round will bring some relief for you lot there, or perhaps wait for the fifth of november :)
And about the drunk shout-outs, I actually meant that if a bloke near you is drunk, and very annoying and looking for a fight or whatever, and you in your frustration blurt out something like "I'm gonna cut your throat if you don't get the fuck away from me", so saying it sober, but in a state of severe frustration.
Doesn't mean you'd mean it, or actually would be capable of doing that, so shouldn't be grounds for the police to arrest you.
Perhaps warn you and say something along the lines of "That's not a very nice thing to say, watch your language" but that should be it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806724</id>
	<title>Easy fix</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263821940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Everyone please send exactly the same message.  Make sure that the police and courts have lots and lots of work to do and your reps gets rapped hard for letting this crap happen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone please send exactly the same message .
Make sure that the police and courts have lots and lots of work to do and your reps gets rapped hard for letting this crap happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Everyone please send exactly the same message.
Make sure that the police and courts have lots and lots of work to do and your reps gets rapped hard for letting this crap happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806978</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>theguyfromsaturn</author>
	<datestamp>1263823560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the other hand, we've been unundated with stories where people make threats of killing people at xxx school etc. And actually carry it out.  There is a difference between shouting something akin to "I'm gonna kill you" when you are frustrated, and putting your frustration up on display on a very public billboard.  One is just the current frustration, the other "may" indicate some deeper trouble that authorities will be blamed for ignoring once it's been made so public.

Maybe these social networks make it too easy to post things from a handy cell-phone etc.  and it blurrs the line for some people between what constitutes "shouting in frustration" and making a public threat, in print, so that many can witness it.  Users of public sites like Facebook and Twitter, or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., need to understand that it's not a private forum for them and their buddies.  It is a very public forum, and anything they say there is broadcast to everybody and their aunts.  It WAS a public threat.  Was it outburst of frustration?  Probably.  Have people killed other people out of frustration?  Definitely.

My advice is: if you are prone to make exaggerated comments out of frustration, and cannot distinguish between twitter and your good buddies, then you should consider staying out of social networks altogether.  As for the authorities, given the number of deranged people who have actually carried out their public blog threats of killing people in public places, they cannot afford to ignore these public outbursts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , we 've been unundated with stories where people make threats of killing people at xxx school etc .
And actually carry it out .
There is a difference between shouting something akin to " I 'm gon na kill you " when you are frustrated , and putting your frustration up on display on a very public billboard .
One is just the current frustration , the other " may " indicate some deeper trouble that authorities will be blamed for ignoring once it 's been made so public .
Maybe these social networks make it too easy to post things from a handy cell-phone etc .
and it blurrs the line for some people between what constitutes " shouting in frustration " and making a public threat , in print , so that many can witness it .
Users of public sites like Facebook and Twitter , or /. , need to understand that it 's not a private forum for them and their buddies .
It is a very public forum , and anything they say there is broadcast to everybody and their aunts .
It WAS a public threat .
Was it outburst of frustration ?
Probably. Have people killed other people out of frustration ?
Definitely . My advice is : if you are prone to make exaggerated comments out of frustration , and can not distinguish between twitter and your good buddies , then you should consider staying out of social networks altogether .
As for the authorities , given the number of deranged people who have actually carried out their public blog threats of killing people in public places , they can not afford to ignore these public outbursts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, we've been unundated with stories where people make threats of killing people at xxx school etc.
And actually carry it out.
There is a difference between shouting something akin to "I'm gonna kill you" when you are frustrated, and putting your frustration up on display on a very public billboard.
One is just the current frustration, the other "may" indicate some deeper trouble that authorities will be blamed for ignoring once it's been made so public.
Maybe these social networks make it too easy to post things from a handy cell-phone etc.
and it blurrs the line for some people between what constitutes "shouting in frustration" and making a public threat, in print, so that many can witness it.
Users of public sites like Facebook and Twitter, or /., need to understand that it's not a private forum for them and their buddies.
It is a very public forum, and anything they say there is broadcast to everybody and their aunts.
It WAS a public threat.
Was it outburst of frustration?
Probably.  Have people killed other people out of frustration?
Definitely.

My advice is: if you are prone to make exaggerated comments out of frustration, and cannot distinguish between twitter and your good buddies, then you should consider staying out of social networks altogether.
As for the authorities, given the number of deranged people who have actually carried out their public blog threats of killing people in public places, they cannot afford to ignore these public outbursts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806046</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263813480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen.</p></div> </blockquote><p>It's depressing as hell to be a citizen of <strong>any</strong> western country because this is going to happen everywhere in the western so-called civilized world. Unless nobody noticed that, we had police abuse in the USA, the UK, Canada, Netherlands, Germany, Italy, France, Greece and other countries. I'm not completely sure if that's a side effect of the global market, but the evidence of it is overwhelming and it is the main reason why I refused to have children: the world is going to see the worst dystopian novels come true in a few years and I would not want to see my sons live such a miserable life.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen .
It 's depressing as hell to be a citizen of any western country because this is going to happen everywhere in the western so-called civilized world .
Unless nobody noticed that , we had police abuse in the USA , the UK , Canada , Netherlands , Germany , Italy , France , Greece and other countries .
I 'm not completely sure if that 's a side effect of the global market , but the evidence of it is overwhelming and it is the main reason why I refused to have children : the world is going to see the worst dystopian novels come true in a few years and I would not want to see my sons live such a miserable life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen.
It's depressing as hell to be a citizen of any western country because this is going to happen everywhere in the western so-called civilized world.
Unless nobody noticed that, we had police abuse in the USA, the UK, Canada, Netherlands, Germany, Italy, France, Greece and other countries.
I'm not completely sure if that's a side effect of the global market, but the evidence of it is overwhelming and it is the main reason why I refused to have children: the world is going to see the worst dystopian novels come true in a few years and I would not want to see my sons live such a miserable life.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807762</id>
	<title>Re:Living in fear</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1263829260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The use kid gloves, right, to try to convince the smart arse that they aren't a bunch of goddamn authoritarian apes, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The use kid gloves , right , to try to convince the smart arse that they are n't a bunch of goddamn authoritarian apes , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The use kid gloves, right, to try to convince the smart arse that they aren't a bunch of goddamn authoritarian apes, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809496</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1263838080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>If you say "I'm gonna kill you," I don't think you deserve a life sentence but six months in prison would be warranted. That'll give you an opportunity to practice self-restraint.</i> <br> <br>

Nonsense. That is a remark we might expect from someone who takes himself way too seriously. Otherwise Steve Ballmer would have spent a few months in the slammer for simply saying "I'm gonna fucking bury Google". A sense of perspective is a Good Thing(TM).</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you say " I 'm gon na kill you , " I do n't think you deserve a life sentence but six months in prison would be warranted .
That 'll give you an opportunity to practice self-restraint .
Nonsense. That is a remark we might expect from someone who takes himself way too seriously .
Otherwise Steve Ballmer would have spent a few months in the slammer for simply saying " I 'm gon na fucking bury Google " .
A sense of perspective is a Good Thing ( TM ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you say "I'm gonna kill you," I don't think you deserve a life sentence but six months in prison would be warranted.
That'll give you an opportunity to practice self-restraint.
Nonsense. That is a remark we might expect from someone who takes himself way too seriously.
Otherwise Steve Ballmer would have spent a few months in the slammer for simply saying "I'm gonna fucking bury Google".
A sense of perspective is a Good Thing(TM).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806360</id>
	<title>There's a bomb in this message.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This message will explode in 30 seconds!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This message will explode in 30 seconds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This message will explode in 30 seconds!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809070</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>OldSoldier</author>
	<datestamp>1263836220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, just great.</p><p>First in the US we have a guy whose father turned him in and who was on several other countries no-fly-list and yet he's able to board an airplane and try to set off a bomb. Now we have a guy who made only one remark and the authorities are all over him.</p><p>These 2 items are related by the failure of authorities to see the whole picture. In the Christmas day bomber case they didn't put the evidence together to realize he was a threat. In twitter-threat case they over-reacted to only one piece of evidence.</p><p>I would hope that if authorities looked at the entire picture in both cases the proper course of action would have been self evident. So why aren't authorities looking at the WHOLE PICTURE before reacting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , just great.First in the US we have a guy whose father turned him in and who was on several other countries no-fly-list and yet he 's able to board an airplane and try to set off a bomb .
Now we have a guy who made only one remark and the authorities are all over him.These 2 items are related by the failure of authorities to see the whole picture .
In the Christmas day bomber case they did n't put the evidence together to realize he was a threat .
In twitter-threat case they over-reacted to only one piece of evidence.I would hope that if authorities looked at the entire picture in both cases the proper course of action would have been self evident .
So why are n't authorities looking at the WHOLE PICTURE before reacting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, just great.First in the US we have a guy whose father turned him in and who was on several other countries no-fly-list and yet he's able to board an airplane and try to set off a bomb.
Now we have a guy who made only one remark and the authorities are all over him.These 2 items are related by the failure of authorities to see the whole picture.
In the Christmas day bomber case they didn't put the evidence together to realize he was a threat.
In twitter-threat case they over-reacted to only one piece of evidence.I would hope that if authorities looked at the entire picture in both cases the proper course of action would have been self evident.
So why aren't authorities looking at the WHOLE PICTURE before reacting?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806812</id>
	<title>Could be worse</title>
	<author>farlukar</author>
	<datestamp>1263822540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He could have <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x54hqTVtM78" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow"> <i>not</i> been taking pictures of a sewer grate.</a> [youtube.com] <br>Now <i>that's</i> terrism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He could have not been taking pictures of a sewer grate .
[ youtube.com ] Now that 's terrism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He could have  not been taking pictures of a sewer grate.
[youtube.com] Now that's terrism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807808</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1263829500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With those choices, why not vote for the <a href="http://www.omrlp.com/" title="omrlp.com">Official Monster Raving Loony Party</a> [omrlp.com] this year? I mean, they couldn't do any worse than the current UK government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With those choices , why not vote for the Official Monster Raving Loony Party [ omrlp.com ] this year ?
I mean , they could n't do any worse than the current UK government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With those choices, why not vote for the Official Monster Raving Loony Party [omrlp.com] this year?
I mean, they couldn't do any worse than the current UK government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806384</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I broke one of those laws last night, and almost broke a second. Best tell her what sort of guy shes going out with...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I broke one of those laws last night , and almost broke a second .
Best tell her what sort of guy shes going out with.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I broke one of those laws last night, and almost broke a second.
Best tell her what sort of guy shes going out with...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807796</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1263829440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Liberal Democrats: Actually think we should have more socialism, and the canonical example of politicians thinking that "fair" just means "screwing people who probably aren't going to vote for us anyway".</i></p><p>The Lib Dems are <i>not</i> socalist. And you say it as if the UK is in any way socialist, which is nonsense. They might be more left wing than the other parties, but that's not saying very much given how they've both moved to the right, and the Lib Dems are left wing in areas that seem reasonable (e.g., money for higher education rather than tuition fees - and not that private companies in general should be under Government control).</p><p>But they are the ones strongest on civil liberties - they're the party to vote for if you want less of nonsense like in this story. They're also the party to support if you want more evidence based policies regarding things like drugs, as you mention.</p><p>Not that I think they're perfect, but I'm not sure I would describe them as "extreme".</p><p><i>UKIP: Some of their policies sound quite respectable</i></p><p>I see it as in the sense that even a broken clock is right twice a day<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I get the impression that they care about things like freedom, when it affects the white middle class Christian male (hence they oppose ID cards, for example, all the while everyone will have to have one). But otherwise, they mean things like freedom for men to tell women what they're allowed to wear (as in the recent claim that the Burka should be banned).</p><p><i>Maybe someone does need to found a moderate, relatively central party</i></p><p>Whilst extremes can be bad, moderation isn't necessarily always good either (see fallacy of argument to moderation). What would be better is if we had a better voting system than FPTP, such as STV, Approval or Condorcet. That way people can vote for a range of parties they agree with, without needing a single party that magically they agree with on everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Liberal Democrats : Actually think we should have more socialism , and the canonical example of politicians thinking that " fair " just means " screwing people who probably are n't going to vote for us anyway " .The Lib Dems are not socalist .
And you say it as if the UK is in any way socialist , which is nonsense .
They might be more left wing than the other parties , but that 's not saying very much given how they 've both moved to the right , and the Lib Dems are left wing in areas that seem reasonable ( e.g. , money for higher education rather than tuition fees - and not that private companies in general should be under Government control ) .But they are the ones strongest on civil liberties - they 're the party to vote for if you want less of nonsense like in this story .
They 're also the party to support if you want more evidence based policies regarding things like drugs , as you mention.Not that I think they 're perfect , but I 'm not sure I would describe them as " extreme " .UKIP : Some of their policies sound quite respectableI see it as in the sense that even a broken clock is right twice a day ... I get the impression that they care about things like freedom , when it affects the white middle class Christian male ( hence they oppose ID cards , for example , all the while everyone will have to have one ) .
But otherwise , they mean things like freedom for men to tell women what they 're allowed to wear ( as in the recent claim that the Burka should be banned ) .Maybe someone does need to found a moderate , relatively central partyWhilst extremes can be bad , moderation is n't necessarily always good either ( see fallacy of argument to moderation ) .
What would be better is if we had a better voting system than FPTP , such as STV , Approval or Condorcet .
That way people can vote for a range of parties they agree with , without needing a single party that magically they agree with on everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Liberal Democrats: Actually think we should have more socialism, and the canonical example of politicians thinking that "fair" just means "screwing people who probably aren't going to vote for us anyway".The Lib Dems are not socalist.
And you say it as if the UK is in any way socialist, which is nonsense.
They might be more left wing than the other parties, but that's not saying very much given how they've both moved to the right, and the Lib Dems are left wing in areas that seem reasonable (e.g., money for higher education rather than tuition fees - and not that private companies in general should be under Government control).But they are the ones strongest on civil liberties - they're the party to vote for if you want less of nonsense like in this story.
They're also the party to support if you want more evidence based policies regarding things like drugs, as you mention.Not that I think they're perfect, but I'm not sure I would describe them as "extreme".UKIP: Some of their policies sound quite respectableI see it as in the sense that even a broken clock is right twice a day ... I get the impression that they care about things like freedom, when it affects the white middle class Christian male (hence they oppose ID cards, for example, all the while everyone will have to have one).
But otherwise, they mean things like freedom for men to tell women what they're allowed to wear (as in the recent claim that the Burka should be banned).Maybe someone does need to found a moderate, relatively central partyWhilst extremes can be bad, moderation isn't necessarily always good either (see fallacy of argument to moderation).
What would be better is if we had a better voting system than FPTP, such as STV, Approval or Condorcet.
That way people can vote for a range of parties they agree with, without needing a single party that magically they agree with on everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ehmm, no offense, but what happened to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden\_of\_proof" title="wikipedia.org">Burden of Proof</a> [wikipedia.org], which the D.A. should present to within certainty show that you were about to commit a felony?<br>
I mean, I'm sure you once shouted something akin to "I'm gonna kill you" to some drunk idiot on a Saturday night. Not a nice thing to say, granted but that doesn't make you immediately want to kill that person. Frustration has a tendency to make you say things you don't mean and/or would never do, that's why in most western countries it's very rare for someone to be trialled for something they did not (yet) commit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ehmm , no offense , but what happened to the Burden of Proof [ wikipedia.org ] , which the D.A .
should present to within certainty show that you were about to commit a felony ?
I mean , I 'm sure you once shouted something akin to " I 'm gon na kill you " to some drunk idiot on a Saturday night .
Not a nice thing to say , granted but that does n't make you immediately want to kill that person .
Frustration has a tendency to make you say things you do n't mean and/or would never do , that 's why in most western countries it 's very rare for someone to be trialled for something they did not ( yet ) commit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ehmm, no offense, but what happened to the Burden of Proof [wikipedia.org], which the D.A.
should present to within certainty show that you were about to commit a felony?
I mean, I'm sure you once shouted something akin to "I'm gonna kill you" to some drunk idiot on a Saturday night.
Not a nice thing to say, granted but that doesn't make you immediately want to kill that person.
Frustration has a tendency to make you say things you don't mean and/or would never do, that's why in most western countries it's very rare for someone to be trialled for something they did not (yet) commit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</id>
	<title>Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263811380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>We don't want to get slashdot in trouble.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't want to get slashdot in trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't want to get slashdot in trouble.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807624</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1263828600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>is normal for police to investigate, I really don't blame them there. They quickly saw there was nothing to it.</i></p><p>Not true - he's on bail, and may yet be charged. They've also stolen, sorry, confiscated his mobile phone, home computer and laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is normal for police to investigate , I really do n't blame them there .
They quickly saw there was nothing to it.Not true - he 's on bail , and may yet be charged .
They 've also stolen , sorry , confiscated his mobile phone , home computer and laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is normal for police to investigate, I really don't blame them there.
They quickly saw there was nothing to it.Not true - he's on bail, and may yet be charged.
They've also stolen, sorry, confiscated his mobile phone, home computer and laptop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808436</id>
	<title>The REAL problem</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1263832920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, he got into trouble because twitter is a PUBLIC forum.  But what forum do we have to communicate with each other where we can expect NO ONE IS EAVESDROPPING?  Because the REAL problem is there is NO SUCH FORUM.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , he got into trouble because twitter is a PUBLIC forum .
But what forum do we have to communicate with each other where we can expect NO ONE IS EAVESDROPPING ?
Because the REAL problem is there is NO SUCH FORUM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, he got into trouble because twitter is a PUBLIC forum.
But what forum do we have to communicate with each other where we can expect NO ONE IS EAVESDROPPING?
Because the REAL problem is there is NO SUCH FORUM.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806232</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1263815760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Slowly</i> moving? This has all come about during Nu-Labour's time in office, mostly Tony Blaire.<br> <br>Hopefully forcing him to give evidence publicly regarding the invasion of the Middle East will see him get some form of just desserts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slowly moving ?
This has all come about during Nu-Labour 's time in office , mostly Tony Blaire .
Hopefully forcing him to give evidence publicly regarding the invasion of the Middle East will see him get some form of just desserts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slowly moving?
This has all come about during Nu-Labour's time in office, mostly Tony Blaire.
Hopefully forcing him to give evidence publicly regarding the invasion of the Middle East will see him get some form of just desserts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806140</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263814800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Deutschland?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Deutschland ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Deutschland?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806108</id>
	<title>Re:Living in fear</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263814440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up. what should i do ?</p></div><p>Could be worse, for me it's just the left hand rear tire, aka LHR. Could you imagine how lazy pigs fishing for leads (on twitter, FFS[1]) would react to "I need to blow up the LHR"?</p><p>[1] "Yeah sarge, just found out about 'da bomb'. It's going down at chelle97's mum's flat this weekend. It was on that Al-Taliban site, myspace".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up .
what should i do ? Could be worse , for me it 's just the left hand rear tire , aka LHR .
Could you imagine how lazy pigs fishing for leads ( on twitter , FFS [ 1 ] ) would react to " I need to blow up the LHR " ?
[ 1 ] " Yeah sarge , just found out about 'da bomb' .
It 's going down at chelle97 's mum 's flat this weekend .
It was on that Al-Taliban site , myspace " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up.
what should i do ?Could be worse, for me it's just the left hand rear tire, aka LHR.
Could you imagine how lazy pigs fishing for leads (on twitter, FFS[1]) would react to "I need to blow up the LHR"?
[1] "Yeah sarge, just found out about 'da bomb'.
It's going down at chelle97's mum's flat this weekend.
It was on that Al-Taliban site, myspace".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809032</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1263836100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't get his joke at all.  I mean...it wasn't even close to being funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't get his joke at all .
I mean...it was n't even close to being funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't get his joke at all.
I mean...it wasn't even close to being funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808866</id>
	<title>Our taooless society now has a new set of taboos</title>
	<author>aynoknman</author>
	<datestamp>1263835380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having by and large abandoned sexual taboos, we now have a whole new range of taboos having to do with our physical security.
<br>
"Don't ride your bicycle without a helmet"
<br>
"Don't smoke"
<br>
"Don't mention bombs in airports"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having by and large abandoned sexual taboos , we now have a whole new range of taboos having to do with our physical security .
" Do n't ride your bicycle without a helmet " " Do n't smoke " " Do n't mention bombs in airports "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having by and large abandoned sexual taboos, we now have a whole new range of taboos having to do with our physical security.
"Don't ride your bicycle without a helmet"

"Don't smoke"

"Don't mention bombs in airports"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806480</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>sa1lnr</author>
	<datestamp>1263818700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties."</p><p>Labour were, "New" Labour never were.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties .
" Labour were , " New " Labour never were .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties.
"Labour were, "New" Labour never were.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922</id>
	<title>Living in fear</title>
	<author>naeone</author>
	<datestamp>1263812100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up. what should i do ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up .
what should i do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up.
what should i do ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806356</id>
	<title>Why are so many rushing to his defense?</title>
	<author>pspahn</author>
	<datestamp>1263817440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You say, "the terrorists won" when things like this happen. But to me, it sounds like most of you are on the same side as them. So quick to bash the security agencies, when you all should be having a little more concern over your own thoughts. This was obviously a lack of common sense on the poster's part. You don't honestly believe that a bomb threat that sounds legitimate would be simply ignored, do you? If you think bomb threats should be ignored, then you're on the wrong side. <br> <br>
We live in different times now, get used to it. Your days of making jokes at the taxpayer's expense are over, and the sooner you all get the message the better. I'm not keen on the public paying for this kind of crap when that money could instead be used towards education... something most of you apparently need.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You say , " the terrorists won " when things like this happen .
But to me , it sounds like most of you are on the same side as them .
So quick to bash the security agencies , when you all should be having a little more concern over your own thoughts .
This was obviously a lack of common sense on the poster 's part .
You do n't honestly believe that a bomb threat that sounds legitimate would be simply ignored , do you ?
If you think bomb threats should be ignored , then you 're on the wrong side .
We live in different times now , get used to it .
Your days of making jokes at the taxpayer 's expense are over , and the sooner you all get the message the better .
I 'm not keen on the public paying for this kind of crap when that money could instead be used towards education... something most of you apparently need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say, "the terrorists won" when things like this happen.
But to me, it sounds like most of you are on the same side as them.
So quick to bash the security agencies, when you all should be having a little more concern over your own thoughts.
This was obviously a lack of common sense on the poster's part.
You don't honestly believe that a bomb threat that sounds legitimate would be simply ignored, do you?
If you think bomb threats should be ignored, then you're on the wrong side.
We live in different times now, get used to it.
Your days of making jokes at the taxpayer's expense are over, and the sooner you all get the message the better.
I'm not keen on the public paying for this kind of crap when that money could instead be used towards education... something most of you apparently need.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810308</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263841620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The lib dem party is crazy. They have more than their fair share of extremists, they just happen to have roughly equal amounts of nut cases from each pole. This gives them the look and feel of a fair party but beware, they're probably more dangerous than any other party out there. Much too unpredictable for me thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The lib dem party is crazy .
They have more than their fair share of extremists , they just happen to have roughly equal amounts of nut cases from each pole .
This gives them the look and feel of a fair party but beware , they 're probably more dangerous than any other party out there .
Much too unpredictable for me thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lib dem party is crazy.
They have more than their fair share of extremists, they just happen to have roughly equal amounts of nut cases from each pole.
This gives them the look and feel of a fair party but beware, they're probably more dangerous than any other party out there.
Much too unpredictable for me thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>internewt</author>
	<datestamp>1263814980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime.</p></div><p>But he didn't threaten anyone, unless you have the reading comprehension of a child and cannot see a joke when one is presented to you.... oh yeah, this is the same police that recently had to lower their testing pass mark as they weren't getting enough recruits. Looks like that policy's working!</p><p>The guy from TFA made the mistake of saying something that allowed the pigs to use powers that if they don't use, they might lose!</p><p><i>"Can't have that training be wasted" said police PR spokesman H. Himmler.</i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone 's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime.But he did n't threaten anyone , unless you have the reading comprehension of a child and can not see a joke when one is presented to you.... oh yeah , this is the same police that recently had to lower their testing pass mark as they were n't getting enough recruits .
Looks like that policy 's working ! The guy from TFA made the mistake of saying something that allowed the pigs to use powers that if they do n't use , they might lose !
" Ca n't have that training be wasted " said police PR spokesman H. Himmler .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime.But he didn't threaten anyone, unless you have the reading comprehension of a child and cannot see a joke when one is presented to you.... oh yeah, this is the same police that recently had to lower their testing pass mark as they weren't getting enough recruits.
Looks like that policy's working!The guy from TFA made the mistake of saying something that allowed the pigs to use powers that if they don't use, they might lose!
"Can't have that training be wasted" said police PR spokesman H. Himmler.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263813180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone 's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806430</id>
	<title>Re:idiot</title>
	<author>netpixie</author>
	<datestamp>1263818220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wholeheartedly agree. In this case exactly the right thing happened. The Police acted appropriately, and everything is OK with the world.</p><p>What is sad is that the parent post (currently) isn't top-rated, instead it's some off-topic nonsense. WTF?</p><p>By all means have a go when stupid laws shaft innocent people, but when sensible laws shaft idiots, then there is nothing to complain about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wholeheartedly agree .
In this case exactly the right thing happened .
The Police acted appropriately , and everything is OK with the world.What is sad is that the parent post ( currently ) is n't top-rated , instead it 's some off-topic nonsense .
WTF ? By all means have a go when stupid laws shaft innocent people , but when sensible laws shaft idiots , then there is nothing to complain about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wholeheartedly agree.
In this case exactly the right thing happened.
The Police acted appropriately, and everything is OK with the world.What is sad is that the parent post (currently) isn't top-rated, instead it's some off-topic nonsense.
WTF?By all means have a go when stupid laws shaft innocent people, but when sensible laws shaft idiots, then there is nothing to complain about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805932</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only would have have probably dozens of personally identifying twitters already written in the past, he didn't think his comment would warrant such a response to begin with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only would have have probably dozens of personally identifying twitters already written in the past , he did n't think his comment would warrant such a response to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only would have have probably dozens of personally identifying twitters already written in the past, he didn't think his comment would warrant such a response to begin with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808792</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263835080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, you do have the perfectly valid option to vote "Official Monster Raving Loony Party".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you do have the perfectly valid option to vote " Official Monster Raving Loony Party " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you do have the perfectly valid option to vote "Official Monster Raving Loony Party".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806710</id>
	<title>Re:idiot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263821760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid. </i></p><p>Suppose I wrote the same sentences in my diary. Would that constitute making a bomb threat? Bear in mind, I've told no-one at the airport that I'd intend to blow it up.</p><p>Suppose my diary is not under lock and key, but is open to a few friends and family. Again, I've made no communication to the airport or anyone associated with it. Does this constitute me making a threat to them?</p><p>His twitter post was made in the reasonable expectation that it would never be seen by anyone related to the airport. It is therefore reasonable to assume it wasn't a bomb threat. If he had sent a letter to the airport, even anonymously, the reverse would be true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid .
Suppose I wrote the same sentences in my diary .
Would that constitute making a bomb threat ?
Bear in mind , I 've told no-one at the airport that I 'd intend to blow it up.Suppose my diary is not under lock and key , but is open to a few friends and family .
Again , I 've made no communication to the airport or anyone associated with it .
Does this constitute me making a threat to them ? His twitter post was made in the reasonable expectation that it would never be seen by anyone related to the airport .
It is therefore reasonable to assume it was n't a bomb threat .
If he had sent a letter to the airport , even anonymously , the reverse would be true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid.
Suppose I wrote the same sentences in my diary.
Would that constitute making a bomb threat?
Bear in mind, I've told no-one at the airport that I'd intend to blow it up.Suppose my diary is not under lock and key, but is open to a few friends and family.
Again, I've made no communication to the airport or anyone associated with it.
Does this constitute me making a threat to them?His twitter post was made in the reasonable expectation that it would never be seen by anyone related to the airport.
It is therefore reasonable to assume it wasn't a bomb threat.
If he had sent a letter to the airport, even anonymously, the reverse would be true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807524</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1263828060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No one has any problem with the police investigating it.</p><p>The problem is when the "investigation" results in totally messing over his life, even when it's now clear it was just a joke, and that he may still be charged for the privilege of it all.</p><p>RTFA - unfortunately the Slashdot link contains few details, you have to read The Independent story that it was taken from, <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html" title="independent.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html</a> [independent.co.uk] .</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No one has any problem with the police investigating it.The problem is when the " investigation " results in totally messing over his life , even when it 's now clear it was just a joke , and that he may still be charged for the privilege of it all.RTFA - unfortunately the Slashdot link contains few details , you have to read The Independent story that it was taken from , http : //www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html [ independent.co.uk ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one has any problem with the police investigating it.The problem is when the "investigation" results in totally messing over his life, even when it's now clear it was just a joke, and that he may still be charged for the privilege of it all.RTFA - unfortunately the Slashdot link contains few details, you have to read The Independent story that it was taken from, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/twitter-joke-led-to-terror-act-arrest-and-airport-life-ban-1870913.html [independent.co.uk] .</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810598</id>
	<title>Re:Our taooless society now has a new set of taboo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263843120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh yeah!  You're totally right!  Tack on</p><p>"Don't drive drunk"<br>"Don't text/talk on your phone while driving"<br>"Don't punch pregnant women in the stomach"<br>"Don't kidnap the pope"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>man, there's just so many cultural taboos!  the list is endless!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh yeah !
You 're totally right !
Tack on " Do n't drive drunk " " Do n't text/talk on your phone while driving " " Do n't punch pregnant women in the stomach " " Do n't kidnap the pope " ...man , there 's just so many cultural taboos !
the list is endless !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh yeah!
You're totally right!
Tack on"Don't drive drunk""Don't text/talk on your phone while driving""Don't punch pregnant women in the stomach""Don't kidnap the pope" ...man, there's just so many cultural taboos!
the list is endless!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806270</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Barefoot Monkey</author>
	<datestamp>1263816180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Absolutely. But where else is there to go where they speak English and don't have conscription or identity cards? The US - nope, it's support our troops or get out over there too. Australia - rampant net censorship. New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Let's see... Zimbabwe's right out. I would suggest Oz or NZ but you already discounted those. South Africa could be a good option, although the affirmative action is overboard. That leaves... Canada!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely .
But where else is there to go where they speak English and do n't have conscription or identity cards ?
The US - nope , it 's support our troops or get out over there too .
Australia - rampant net censorship .
New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare .
Let 's see... Zimbabwe 's right out .
I would suggest Oz or NZ but you already discounted those .
South Africa could be a good option , although the affirmative action is overboard .
That leaves... Canada !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely.
But where else is there to go where they speak English and don't have conscription or identity cards?
The US - nope, it's support our troops or get out over there too.
Australia - rampant net censorship.
New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare.
Let's see... Zimbabwe's right out.
I would suggest Oz or NZ but you already discounted those.
South Africa could be a good option, although the affirmative action is overboard.
That leaves... Canada!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</id>
	<title>idiot</title>
	<author>chentiangemalc</author>
	<datestamp>1263815280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid. this is nothing new with bomb threats though , even pre-9/11 when in primary school somebody called our principal and made a bomb threat, and the whole school had to be cleared for the day while it was searched, and even though no bomb was found the police still spent some effort to find the prankster, because even as a joke there is a necessity for such threats to be investigated, and is a waste of police resources and time.

don't even bother with proxy, just don't make bomb threats, it's not smart or funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid .
this is nothing new with bomb threats though , even pre-9/11 when in primary school somebody called our principal and made a bomb threat , and the whole school had to be cleared for the day while it was searched , and even though no bomb was found the police still spent some effort to find the prankster , because even as a joke there is a necessity for such threats to be investigated , and is a waste of police resources and time .
do n't even bother with proxy , just do n't make bomb threats , it 's not smart or funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid.
this is nothing new with bomb threats though , even pre-9/11 when in primary school somebody called our principal and made a bomb threat, and the whole school had to be cleared for the day while it was searched, and even though no bomb was found the police still spent some effort to find the prankster, because even as a joke there is a necessity for such threats to be investigated, and is a waste of police resources and time.
don't even bother with proxy, just don't make bomb threats, it's not smart or funny.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806644</id>
	<title>idiot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263821040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid.</p></div><p>While making jokes about bomb threats may or may not be the smartest thing to do these days, I used to look for security weaknesses or blindspots at every government building I worked over the years going back before September 11, 2001. In my mind I would plot how to penetrate the facility for the purpose of merely getting past security and any CCTV cameras. Surprisingly, an actual attack would have been almost too easy to execute. High-powered rifle to take-out the CCTV cameras; walk up to the security desk and toss a couple grenades or more quietly shoot the one or two security guards, they fall behind the high counter concealing their corpses, jump the turn-style and walk around the building. Am I a terrorist or simply someone bored with the daily walk to and from the workplace?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid.While making jokes about bomb threats may or may not be the smartest thing to do these days , I used to look for security weaknesses or blindspots at every government building I worked over the years going back before September 11 , 2001 .
In my mind I would plot how to penetrate the facility for the purpose of merely getting past security and any CCTV cameras .
Surprisingly , an actual attack would have been almost too easy to execute .
High-powered rifle to take-out the CCTV cameras ; walk up to the security desk and toss a couple grenades or more quietly shoot the one or two security guards , they fall behind the high counter concealing their corpses , jump the turn-style and walk around the building .
Am I a terrorist or simply someone bored with the daily walk to and from the workplace ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid.While making jokes about bomb threats may or may not be the smartest thing to do these days, I used to look for security weaknesses or blindspots at every government building I worked over the years going back before September 11, 2001.
In my mind I would plot how to penetrate the facility for the purpose of merely getting past security and any CCTV cameras.
Surprisingly, an actual attack would have been almost too easy to execute.
High-powered rifle to take-out the CCTV cameras; walk up to the security desk and toss a couple grenades or more quietly shoot the one or two security guards, they fall behind the high counter concealing their corpses, jump the turn-style and walk around the building.
Am I a terrorist or simply someone bored with the daily walk to and from the workplace?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807298</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263826200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know how <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3grHjibNdA" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">these guys</a> [youtube.com] stayed out of jail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know how these guys [ youtube.com ] stayed out of jail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know how these guys [youtube.com] stayed out of jail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808838</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263835320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>at least it has taught this man a lesson, he has now made his tweets private (I just checked(.</p><p>if you write a public tweet threatening to blow a public building, you get arrested by the public police. It all makes sense, at least to me.</p><p>If it was a joke, too bad, try our sense of humor another time!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>at least it has taught this man a lesson , he has now made his tweets private ( I just checked ( .if you write a public tweet threatening to blow a public building , you get arrested by the public police .
It all makes sense , at least to me.If it was a joke , too bad , try our sense of humor another time !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>at least it has taught this man a lesson, he has now made his tweets private (I just checked(.if you write a public tweet threatening to blow a public building, you get arrested by the public police.
It all makes sense, at least to me.If it was a joke, too bad, try our sense of humor another time!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806974</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1263823560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Twitter may be a relatively new technology, but from the perspective of the police this is no different from phoning up a TV or radio station and saying that you're going to blow up the airport.</p></div><p>Then the police are fucking idiots who shouldn't be allowed to be involved any time the alleged crime involves a computer. Anyway, that's pure bullshit. Plenty of cops must be twats (twits are the messages; twats are the users) so they must know what Twitter is like; small, irrelevant messages from people too uninteresting to post long comments.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Twitter may be a relatively new technology , but from the perspective of the police this is no different from phoning up a TV or radio station and saying that you 're going to blow up the airport.Then the police are fucking idiots who should n't be allowed to be involved any time the alleged crime involves a computer .
Anyway , that 's pure bullshit .
Plenty of cops must be twats ( twits are the messages ; twats are the users ) so they must know what Twitter is like ; small , irrelevant messages from people too uninteresting to post long comments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twitter may be a relatively new technology, but from the perspective of the police this is no different from phoning up a TV or radio station and saying that you're going to blow up the airport.Then the police are fucking idiots who shouldn't be allowed to be involved any time the alleged crime involves a computer.
Anyway, that's pure bullshit.
Plenty of cops must be twats (twits are the messages; twats are the users) so they must know what Twitter is like; small, irrelevant messages from people too uninteresting to post long comments.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263813300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely. But where else is there to go where they speak English and don't have conscription or identity cards? The US - nope, it's support our troops or get out over there too. Australia - rampant net censorship. New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely .
But where else is there to go where they speak English and do n't have conscription or identity cards ?
The US - nope , it 's support our troops or get out over there too .
Australia - rampant net censorship .
New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely.
But where else is there to go where they speak English and don't have conscription or identity cards?
The US - nope, it's support our troops or get out over there too.
Australia - rampant net censorship.
New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806960</id>
	<title>what are we gonna do tonight bwain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263823440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the same thing we do every night pinky</p><p>TRY AND TAKE OVER THE WORLD</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the same thing we do every night pinkyTRY AND TAKE OVER THE WORLD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the same thing we do every night pinkyTRY AND TAKE OVER THE WORLD</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807226</id>
	<title>Lessons learned</title>
	<author>sacrilicious</author>
	<datestamp>1263825780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the guy's now thinking, "Damnit!!! Things were going so well with my bombing plans... I'd done step 1 'Identify target'... step 2 'obtain explosives'... step 3, 'post plans on worldwide public forum without obfuscation of any kind'...  and then suddenly everything goes to shit for no reason.  What did I do wrong??  How can I help my fellow al quaida brothers learn from whatever subtle mistake I must have made?  Well, time to escape from prison... I'll start by loudly yelling my intention to do so every night at lockdown..."</p><p>I say, hats off to the fine policework in this situation.  Keep those terrorists on the run, boys!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the guy 's now thinking , " Damnit ! ! !
Things were going so well with my bombing plans... I 'd done step 1 'Identify target'... step 2 'obtain explosives'... step 3 , 'post plans on worldwide public forum without obfuscation of any kind'... and then suddenly everything goes to shit for no reason .
What did I do wrong ? ?
How can I help my fellow al quaida brothers learn from whatever subtle mistake I must have made ?
Well , time to escape from prison... I 'll start by loudly yelling my intention to do so every night at lockdown... " I say , hats off to the fine policework in this situation .
Keep those terrorists on the run , boys !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the guy's now thinking, "Damnit!!!
Things were going so well with my bombing plans... I'd done step 1 'Identify target'... step 2 'obtain explosives'... step 3, 'post plans on worldwide public forum without obfuscation of any kind'...  and then suddenly everything goes to shit for no reason.
What did I do wrong??
How can I help my fellow al quaida brothers learn from whatever subtle mistake I must have made?
Well, time to escape from prison... I'll start by loudly yelling my intention to do so every night at lockdown..."I say, hats off to the fine policework in this situation.
Keep those terrorists on the run, boys!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809262</id>
	<title>Police State</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263837000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tell you what America is starting to go downhill with privacy and freedom but the UK is already a police state.</p><p>They have cameras on every corner and can search you without a warrant any damn time they please.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tell you what America is starting to go downhill with privacy and freedom but the UK is already a police state.They have cameras on every corner and can search you without a warrant any damn time they please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tell you what America is starting to go downhill with privacy and freedom but the UK is already a police state.They have cameras on every corner and can search you without a warrant any damn time they please.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806608</id>
	<title>How is this any different...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263820500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From waving around a toy gun or selling sugar and pretending it's cocaine? You can get arrested for those things as well because of the potential damage you might cause. Same as yelling "Fire" in the middle of a theatre.</p><p>Fact is, if this guy actually did blow something up and the government didn't do something about it because they didn't think he was serious, they would be crucified. Look at how the US government is being hit because they didn't take seriously  the warnings of the father of the man who tried to blow up that plane on Christmas Day?</p><p>Some people need to grow up and get serious. There is no such thing as a "joke" bomb threat in this day and age.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From waving around a toy gun or selling sugar and pretending it 's cocaine ?
You can get arrested for those things as well because of the potential damage you might cause .
Same as yelling " Fire " in the middle of a theatre.Fact is , if this guy actually did blow something up and the government did n't do something about it because they did n't think he was serious , they would be crucified .
Look at how the US government is being hit because they did n't take seriously the warnings of the father of the man who tried to blow up that plane on Christmas Day ? Some people need to grow up and get serious .
There is no such thing as a " joke " bomb threat in this day and age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From waving around a toy gun or selling sugar and pretending it's cocaine?
You can get arrested for those things as well because of the potential damage you might cause.
Same as yelling "Fire" in the middle of a theatre.Fact is, if this guy actually did blow something up and the government didn't do something about it because they didn't think he was serious, they would be crucified.
Look at how the US government is being hit because they didn't take seriously  the warnings of the father of the man who tried to blow up that plane on Christmas Day?Some people need to grow up and get serious.
There is no such thing as a "joke" bomb threat in this day and age.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806472</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>netpixie</author>
	<datestamp>1263818640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What on earth has this got to do with TFA?</p><p>Yes there are a large number of reasons to be depressed about British law.</p><p>This is *not* one of them.</p><p>In this case a twat broke a sensible, reasonable, well-thought-out law and is paying the price.</p><p>Case closed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What on earth has this got to do with TFA ? Yes there are a large number of reasons to be depressed about British law.This is * not * one of them.In this case a twat broke a sensible , reasonable , well-thought-out law and is paying the price.Case closed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What on earth has this got to do with TFA?Yes there are a large number of reasons to be depressed about British law.This is *not* one of them.In this case a twat broke a sensible, reasonable, well-thought-out law and is paying the price.Case closed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807068</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Mattskimo</author>
	<datestamp>1263824460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well said. Just this morning I saw 2 policemen questioning a photographer near to the Monument in London. I was very tempted to whip out my phone and take a picture (with flash for extra effect) and leg it. The only problem would be if they caught me there are a few pictures of my girlfriend on my phone that they would probably question the legality of (she's 22) and get me blacklisted from certain jobs for life. Awful awful government.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .
Just this morning I saw 2 policemen questioning a photographer near to the Monument in London .
I was very tempted to whip out my phone and take a picture ( with flash for extra effect ) and leg it .
The only problem would be if they caught me there are a few pictures of my girlfriend on my phone that they would probably question the legality of ( she 's 22 ) and get me blacklisted from certain jobs for life .
Awful awful government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.
Just this morning I saw 2 policemen questioning a photographer near to the Monument in London.
I was very tempted to whip out my phone and take a picture (with flash for extra effect) and leg it.
The only problem would be if they caught me there are a few pictures of my girlfriend on my phone that they would probably question the legality of (she's 22) and get me blacklisted from certain jobs for life.
Awful awful government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806380</id>
	<title>Lessons in Literalism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a lesson in appropriate literalism for this chap, isn't it?  When you have the urge to scream something at the top of your lungs in the town square, you'd bloody well better make certain there's no room for misinterpretation, not to mention readiness to own those utterances, eh?  When has that EVER not been good advice?  Whether there's a real threat of a Big Brother in U.K. or not, this is just a story about a thoughtless wanker who likes to spout off in places that aren't very private, and he's learned the possible consequences of his spouting being misunderstood.  This is really not so different from, say, Don Imus in USA making racist remarks on the radio; Imus got smacked around hard for being a thoughtless wanker and lost his job, too, and he was a bit more influential than this chap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a lesson in appropriate literalism for this chap , is n't it ?
When you have the urge to scream something at the top of your lungs in the town square , you 'd bloody well better make certain there 's no room for misinterpretation , not to mention readiness to own those utterances , eh ?
When has that EVER not been good advice ?
Whether there 's a real threat of a Big Brother in U.K. or not , this is just a story about a thoughtless wanker who likes to spout off in places that are n't very private , and he 's learned the possible consequences of his spouting being misunderstood .
This is really not so different from , say , Don Imus in USA making racist remarks on the radio ; Imus got smacked around hard for being a thoughtless wanker and lost his job , too , and he was a bit more influential than this chap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a lesson in appropriate literalism for this chap, isn't it?
When you have the urge to scream something at the top of your lungs in the town square, you'd bloody well better make certain there's no room for misinterpretation, not to mention readiness to own those utterances, eh?
When has that EVER not been good advice?
Whether there's a real threat of a Big Brother in U.K. or not, this is just a story about a thoughtless wanker who likes to spout off in places that aren't very private, and he's learned the possible consequences of his spouting being misunderstood.
This is really not so different from, say, Don Imus in USA making racist remarks on the radio; Imus got smacked around hard for being a thoughtless wanker and lost his job, too, and he was a bit more influential than this chap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807542</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>kegon</author>
	<datestamp>1263828240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I can't remember ever having heard a funny threat.</p></div></blockquote><p>I think for his tweet to be classified a "threat" there must be some sense of seriousness to it. Threats do not normally start <b>Crap!</b> and finish with 2 exclamation marks. Also, they do not normally get published on social networking sites.</p><p>What we have here is a rant, plain and simple. If I was arrested every time I had a rant online I would never be released!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't remember ever having heard a funny threat.I think for his tweet to be classified a " threat " there must be some sense of seriousness to it .
Threats do not normally start Crap !
and finish with 2 exclamation marks .
Also , they do not normally get published on social networking sites.What we have here is a rant , plain and simple .
If I was arrested every time I had a rant online I would never be released !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't remember ever having heard a funny threat.I think for his tweet to be classified a "threat" there must be some sense of seriousness to it.
Threats do not normally start Crap!
and finish with 2 exclamation marks.
Also, they do not normally get published on social networking sites.What we have here is a rant, plain and simple.
If I was arrested every time I had a rant online I would never be released!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808398</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>KillBillFan</author>
	<datestamp>1263832740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if I see Jack at the airport<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I should ignore him?</p><p>Hi Jack !!</p><p>Oh, wait a minute, this is security theater, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if I see Jack at the airport ... I should ignore him ? Hi Jack !
! Oh , wait a minute , this is security theater , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if I see Jack at the airport ... I should ignore him?Hi Jack !
!Oh, wait a minute, this is security theater, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806596</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263820380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New Labour (as opposed to the actual left wing Labour party, which they destroyed) are not left-leaning and never have been. The term Labour is there for appearances (Deomcrats, Republicans anyone).The only disagreement between Tony Blair and Thatcher was over Europe - Blair so wants to be a president, Thatcher wants the UK to remain a US colony. Thatcher regarded New Labour as her proudest achievement. New Labour has decided to piratise the National Health service, something Thatcher didn't dare do. Coincidentally, the Tory candidate for Health Secretary has received about &pound;21000 from a private health care company and this is before they have reached office. The ID card nonsense also started in earnest under the Tory governments prior to New Labour. So if you think there will be a change when they are voted in, you are extremely naive. We live in a one party state, and the electorate are periodically allowed to choose the figureheads. The troughing continues uninterrupted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New Labour ( as opposed to the actual left wing Labour party , which they destroyed ) are not left-leaning and never have been .
The term Labour is there for appearances ( Deomcrats , Republicans anyone ) .The only disagreement between Tony Blair and Thatcher was over Europe - Blair so wants to be a president , Thatcher wants the UK to remain a US colony .
Thatcher regarded New Labour as her proudest achievement .
New Labour has decided to piratise the National Health service , something Thatcher did n't dare do .
Coincidentally , the Tory candidate for Health Secretary has received about   21000 from a private health care company and this is before they have reached office .
The ID card nonsense also started in earnest under the Tory governments prior to New Labour .
So if you think there will be a change when they are voted in , you are extremely naive .
We live in a one party state , and the electorate are periodically allowed to choose the figureheads .
The troughing continues uninterrupted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New Labour (as opposed to the actual left wing Labour party, which they destroyed) are not left-leaning and never have been.
The term Labour is there for appearances (Deomcrats, Republicans anyone).The only disagreement between Tony Blair and Thatcher was over Europe - Blair so wants to be a president, Thatcher wants the UK to remain a US colony.
Thatcher regarded New Labour as her proudest achievement.
New Labour has decided to piratise the National Health service, something Thatcher didn't dare do.
Coincidentally, the Tory candidate for Health Secretary has received about £21000 from a private health care company and this is before they have reached office.
The ID card nonsense also started in earnest under the Tory governments prior to New Labour.
So if you think there will be a change when they are voted in, you are extremely naive.
We live in a one party state, and the electorate are periodically allowed to choose the figureheads.
The troughing continues uninterrupted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808044</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>delinear</author>
	<datestamp>1263830760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The important thing here is whether the person you use the threat towards could reasonably be expected to believe he/she was in danger. This also takes into account the characteristics of the victim (i.e. saying it to a big guy he's less likely to suffer harm than if you said it to a little old lady, or shouting it to someone who just cut up your car versus shouting it through someone's letter box in the dead of night).</htmltext>
<tokenext>The important thing here is whether the person you use the threat towards could reasonably be expected to believe he/she was in danger .
This also takes into account the characteristics of the victim ( i.e .
saying it to a big guy he 's less likely to suffer harm than if you said it to a little old lady , or shouting it to someone who just cut up your car versus shouting it through someone 's letter box in the dead of night ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The important thing here is whether the person you use the threat towards could reasonably be expected to believe he/she was in danger.
This also takes into account the characteristics of the victim (i.e.
saying it to a big guy he's less likely to suffer harm than if you said it to a little old lady, or shouting it to someone who just cut up your car versus shouting it through someone's letter box in the dead of night).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806218</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</id>
	<title>sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen.
<br> <br>
You get arrested then released without charge, the police take and store your DNA. The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong, Labour say they don't care.
<br> <br>
You get accused of a sexual offence, it gets recorded. Even if the accusation is entirely baseless and the person who made it is jailed for making it, you'll still have it on your record. Good luck getting a job with children when that accusation is revealed to a potential employer. Even worse, the government can put a court order on these that make it illegal for an employer to reveal why you failed a background check. You're given no legal recourse to this, even if a mistake has been made and you're accidentally added to the register.
<br> <br>
You can have (consensual) kinky sex, but if you video it, you're a sex offender. You can be 18 and have sex with a 17 year old legally but videotape it, you're a sex offender. Draw two stickpeople having sex, label one of them as being 17, you guessed it, you're a sex offender.
<br> <br>
Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq? That'll be declared illegal and you'll be arrested on public decency charges.
<br> <br>
Being held 30 days without charge? Not enough! We must change the law to make it 90 days! After all, you wouldn't have been arrested it you weren't guilty!
<br> <br>
It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties. I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it. Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen .
You get arrested then released without charge , the police take and store your DNA .
The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong , Labour say they do n't care .
You get accused of a sexual offence , it gets recorded .
Even if the accusation is entirely baseless and the person who made it is jailed for making it , you 'll still have it on your record .
Good luck getting a job with children when that accusation is revealed to a potential employer .
Even worse , the government can put a court order on these that make it illegal for an employer to reveal why you failed a background check .
You 're given no legal recourse to this , even if a mistake has been made and you 're accidentally added to the register .
You can have ( consensual ) kinky sex , but if you video it , you 're a sex offender .
You can be 18 and have sex with a 17 year old legally but videotape it , you 're a sex offender .
Draw two stickpeople having sex , label one of them as being 17 , you guessed it , you 're a sex offender .
Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq ?
That 'll be declared illegal and you 'll be arrested on public decency charges .
Being held 30 days without charge ?
Not enough !
We must change the law to make it 90 days !
After all , you would n't have been arrested it you were n't guilty !
It 's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties .
I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they 're in power but I doubt it .
Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen.
You get arrested then released without charge, the police take and store your DNA.
The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong, Labour say they don't care.
You get accused of a sexual offence, it gets recorded.
Even if the accusation is entirely baseless and the person who made it is jailed for making it, you'll still have it on your record.
Good luck getting a job with children when that accusation is revealed to a potential employer.
Even worse, the government can put a court order on these that make it illegal for an employer to reveal why you failed a background check.
You're given no legal recourse to this, even if a mistake has been made and you're accidentally added to the register.
You can have (consensual) kinky sex, but if you video it, you're a sex offender.
You can be 18 and have sex with a 17 year old legally but videotape it, you're a sex offender.
Draw two stickpeople having sex, label one of them as being 17, you guessed it, you're a sex offender.
Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq?
That'll be declared illegal and you'll be arrested on public decency charges.
Being held 30 days without charge?
Not enough!
We must change the law to make it 90 days!
After all, you wouldn't have been arrested it you weren't guilty!
It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties.
I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it.
Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806778</id>
	<title>Re:idiot</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1263822300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just like all the idiots who, when asked by the airport staff if there's anything dangerous in their bags, think it'd be funny to say "yes, a bomb!" ha bloody ha.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like all the idiots who , when asked by the airport staff if there 's anything dangerous in their bags , think it 'd be funny to say " yes , a bomb !
" ha bloody ha .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like all the idiots who, when asked by the airport staff if there's anything dangerous in their bags, think it'd be funny to say "yes, a bomb!
" ha bloody ha.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807802</id>
	<title>Hooray!</title>
	<author>Greyfox</author>
	<datestamp>1263829500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The terrorists have finally succeeded in making it possible to arrest someone for being an idiot! Maybe there's a silver lining to this cloud....</htmltext>
<tokenext>The terrorists have finally succeeded in making it possible to arrest someone for being an idiot !
Maybe there 's a silver lining to this cloud... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The terrorists have finally succeeded in making it possible to arrest someone for being an idiot!
Maybe there's a silver lining to this cloud....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807232</id>
	<title>plural of anecdote is credit report</title>
	<author>epine</author>
	<datestamp>1263825840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Good luck getting a job with children when that accusation is revealed to a potential employer.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sometimes when the world conspires to enact injustice, it's the prison wardens of small minds in the general population who need to be taken to task.  Likewise with your credit record.  A merchant can make an unfounded allegation about payment failure, and the blotch is hard to remove.  Soon people begin to fear the malingering blotch and behave in frightened, risk averse ways, which the worst of the merchants soon begin to exploit.</p><p>Personally, I think the solution is to add teeth to the liability laws, to the point that when a person suffers an social injury (such as denial of employment and credit), there is someone useful to sue for having allowed the unsubstantiated information to flow around the loop in the first place.</p><p>Comments that quickly get you sued if you mention them in public can be erected as monuments if you commit them to permanent electronic storage, equally without basis, and then dress up the reports with an agency masthead.  It doesn't even matter if the agency can tell their torus from a hole in the ground.</p><p><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us\_and\_americas/article6990428.ece" title="timesonline.co.uk">Michael Hicks</a> [timesonline.co.uk]</p><p>Every time his family is detained by airport security for extra Vaseline, it's an offence against their reputation and dignity in the court of small minds who witness the spectacle.</p><p>Kind of makes a guy want to set up a credit reporting agency on relationship fidelity.  A solid marketing tie-in to a couple of dating agencies, you could do pretty good, $20 for a quick peak at the morning-after decorum score would find many takers.  Or just a quick $5 for the post-coital returns-your-call score.</p><p>Of course, 100\% of your data would be scurrilous, but a solidly designed masthead on the official-looking fidelity report seems to take care of this.  Something like "by appointment of the queen" if your headquarters reside in the BVI.  Don't touch that one if you reside in the U.K.  The queen has rights under British law.</p><p>I just don't get why credit reporting agencies and the police enjoy this giant loophole on damaging reputations with unfounded data, when liability laws are in other regards extremely strict on this matter.</p><p>How about one that would appeal to my exogenous backbone, my poker cue of moral outrage?  How about a public CYA cowardice index, which details the many small cowardly decisions people make in life, such as not to interview a person because you've discovered an unsubstantiated allegation as part of a background check, knowing full well that the agency in question does not vouch that there is any reality behind the aspersion, but you then decide to cover your own by screening the person out from further consideration nevertheless, on the grounds that your peers will prove equally mired in cowardice in the judgement of your actions.</p><p>Those are the many tiny moral transactions by which our faulty instruments of government ascend into the shadowy penumbra of totalinariasm.</p><p>The reason there is so much blame in this world against government is that secretly wish government to function well enough to protect us from our own cowardice, which it rarely fails to achieve.</p><p>We could start by demanding a reversal in this effective debasement of our liability laws.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck getting a job with children when that accusation is revealed to a potential employer.Sometimes when the world conspires to enact injustice , it 's the prison wardens of small minds in the general population who need to be taken to task .
Likewise with your credit record .
A merchant can make an unfounded allegation about payment failure , and the blotch is hard to remove .
Soon people begin to fear the malingering blotch and behave in frightened , risk averse ways , which the worst of the merchants soon begin to exploit.Personally , I think the solution is to add teeth to the liability laws , to the point that when a person suffers an social injury ( such as denial of employment and credit ) , there is someone useful to sue for having allowed the unsubstantiated information to flow around the loop in the first place.Comments that quickly get you sued if you mention them in public can be erected as monuments if you commit them to permanent electronic storage , equally without basis , and then dress up the reports with an agency masthead .
It does n't even matter if the agency can tell their torus from a hole in the ground.Michael Hicks [ timesonline.co.uk ] Every time his family is detained by airport security for extra Vaseline , it 's an offence against their reputation and dignity in the court of small minds who witness the spectacle.Kind of makes a guy want to set up a credit reporting agency on relationship fidelity .
A solid marketing tie-in to a couple of dating agencies , you could do pretty good , $ 20 for a quick peak at the morning-after decorum score would find many takers .
Or just a quick $ 5 for the post-coital returns-your-call score.Of course , 100 \ % of your data would be scurrilous , but a solidly designed masthead on the official-looking fidelity report seems to take care of this .
Something like " by appointment of the queen " if your headquarters reside in the BVI .
Do n't touch that one if you reside in the U.K. The queen has rights under British law.I just do n't get why credit reporting agencies and the police enjoy this giant loophole on damaging reputations with unfounded data , when liability laws are in other regards extremely strict on this matter.How about one that would appeal to my exogenous backbone , my poker cue of moral outrage ?
How about a public CYA cowardice index , which details the many small cowardly decisions people make in life , such as not to interview a person because you 've discovered an unsubstantiated allegation as part of a background check , knowing full well that the agency in question does not vouch that there is any reality behind the aspersion , but you then decide to cover your own by screening the person out from further consideration nevertheless , on the grounds that your peers will prove equally mired in cowardice in the judgement of your actions.Those are the many tiny moral transactions by which our faulty instruments of government ascend into the shadowy penumbra of totalinariasm.The reason there is so much blame in this world against government is that secretly wish government to function well enough to protect us from our own cowardice , which it rarely fails to achieve.We could start by demanding a reversal in this effective debasement of our liability laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck getting a job with children when that accusation is revealed to a potential employer.Sometimes when the world conspires to enact injustice, it's the prison wardens of small minds in the general population who need to be taken to task.
Likewise with your credit record.
A merchant can make an unfounded allegation about payment failure, and the blotch is hard to remove.
Soon people begin to fear the malingering blotch and behave in frightened, risk averse ways, which the worst of the merchants soon begin to exploit.Personally, I think the solution is to add teeth to the liability laws, to the point that when a person suffers an social injury (such as denial of employment and credit), there is someone useful to sue for having allowed the unsubstantiated information to flow around the loop in the first place.Comments that quickly get you sued if you mention them in public can be erected as monuments if you commit them to permanent electronic storage, equally without basis, and then dress up the reports with an agency masthead.
It doesn't even matter if the agency can tell their torus from a hole in the ground.Michael Hicks [timesonline.co.uk]Every time his family is detained by airport security for extra Vaseline, it's an offence against their reputation and dignity in the court of small minds who witness the spectacle.Kind of makes a guy want to set up a credit reporting agency on relationship fidelity.
A solid marketing tie-in to a couple of dating agencies, you could do pretty good, $20 for a quick peak at the morning-after decorum score would find many takers.
Or just a quick $5 for the post-coital returns-your-call score.Of course, 100\% of your data would be scurrilous, but a solidly designed masthead on the official-looking fidelity report seems to take care of this.
Something like "by appointment of the queen" if your headquarters reside in the BVI.
Don't touch that one if you reside in the U.K.  The queen has rights under British law.I just don't get why credit reporting agencies and the police enjoy this giant loophole on damaging reputations with unfounded data, when liability laws are in other regards extremely strict on this matter.How about one that would appeal to my exogenous backbone, my poker cue of moral outrage?
How about a public CYA cowardice index, which details the many small cowardly decisions people make in life, such as not to interview a person because you've discovered an unsubstantiated allegation as part of a background check, knowing full well that the agency in question does not vouch that there is any reality behind the aspersion, but you then decide to cover your own by screening the person out from further consideration nevertheless, on the grounds that your peers will prove equally mired in cowardice in the judgement of your actions.Those are the many tiny moral transactions by which our faulty instruments of government ascend into the shadowy penumbra of totalinariasm.The reason there is so much blame in this world against government is that secretly wish government to function well enough to protect us from our own cowardice, which it rarely fails to achieve.We could start by demanding a reversal in this effective debasement of our liability laws.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</id>
	<title>Dissent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How very, very sad. How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ? What a bunch of idiots. Not only the authorities but also the person who reported him.</p><p>It seems we're slowly moving to a state where only correct thinking is allowed. No joking, no sense of humour, irony or annoyance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How very , very sad .
How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ?
What a bunch of idiots .
Not only the authorities but also the person who reported him.It seems we 're slowly moving to a state where only correct thinking is allowed .
No joking , no sense of humour , irony or annoyance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How very, very sad.
How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ?
What a bunch of idiots.
Not only the authorities but also the person who reported him.It seems we're slowly moving to a state where only correct thinking is allowed.
No joking, no sense of humour, irony or annoyance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811492</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Cederic</author>
	<datestamp>1263847380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't have to be kinky, just deemed 'violent'. It's quite hard to have consensual sex without holding your partner at some point, is moving their arm because it's making you uncomfortable an act of force? If so it's violent, and you just broke the law if you videod it. Hell, do you have consent to humiliate your partner by covering them in whipped cream, because if not that's assault in the eyes of the law.</p><p>It's pretty hard to overstate the stupidity of this law. Even though it's targeted at preventing serious abuse it's worded such that it criminalises many people for engaging in consensual and enjoyable activities (and video recording them), and the police have a very strong track record of abusing badly worded laws far beyond their stated intent.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the justification was to give the police/security services time to take action</p> </div><p>No, the justification was that the police needed more time to investigate you, not to take action against others. And the justification was weak, and doesn't excuse holding somebody without charge for even 30 days, let alone 3 months.</p><p>I would rather the terrorists killed people; it'll happen less often than the police will abuse their powers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't have to be kinky , just deemed 'violent' .
It 's quite hard to have consensual sex without holding your partner at some point , is moving their arm because it 's making you uncomfortable an act of force ?
If so it 's violent , and you just broke the law if you videod it .
Hell , do you have consent to humiliate your partner by covering them in whipped cream , because if not that 's assault in the eyes of the law.It 's pretty hard to overstate the stupidity of this law .
Even though it 's targeted at preventing serious abuse it 's worded such that it criminalises many people for engaging in consensual and enjoyable activities ( and video recording them ) , and the police have a very strong track record of abusing badly worded laws far beyond their stated intent.the justification was to give the police/security services time to take action No , the justification was that the police needed more time to investigate you , not to take action against others .
And the justification was weak , and does n't excuse holding somebody without charge for even 30 days , let alone 3 months.I would rather the terrorists killed people ; it 'll happen less often than the police will abuse their powers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't have to be kinky, just deemed 'violent'.
It's quite hard to have consensual sex without holding your partner at some point, is moving their arm because it's making you uncomfortable an act of force?
If so it's violent, and you just broke the law if you videod it.
Hell, do you have consent to humiliate your partner by covering them in whipped cream, because if not that's assault in the eyes of the law.It's pretty hard to overstate the stupidity of this law.
Even though it's targeted at preventing serious abuse it's worded such that it criminalises many people for engaging in consensual and enjoyable activities (and video recording them), and the police have a very strong track record of abusing badly worded laws far beyond their stated intent.the justification was to give the police/security services time to take action No, the justification was that the police needed more time to investigate you, not to take action against others.
And the justification was weak, and doesn't excuse holding somebody without charge for even 30 days, let alone 3 months.I would rather the terrorists killed people; it'll happen less often than the police will abuse their powers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263815100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right. Because we all know, everyone is serious on the internet.</p><p>Nobody should be arrested because the authorities don't have a sense of humor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right .
Because we all know , everyone is serious on the internet.Nobody should be arrested because the authorities do n't have a sense of humor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right.
Because we all know, everyone is serious on the internet.Nobody should be arrested because the authorities don't have a sense of humor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30823488</id>
	<title>i have no problem with this</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1263934020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems like a case of endangering others (clear and present danger) and wasting public resources.  Those cops could have been doing other things. Having lived in a place where bomb threats happened and bombs actually happened... i see no reason this dick should be treated nicely. Under US law, he committed a crime.  Defending this asshat is misguided at best.  If i were AQ, this would be my new tactic.  "I'm in yr arprt, bmb'n yr *$! LoL".  Tweet that over and over until they stop responding... them "KA-BOOM".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like a case of endangering others ( clear and present danger ) and wasting public resources .
Those cops could have been doing other things .
Having lived in a place where bomb threats happened and bombs actually happened... i see no reason this dick should be treated nicely .
Under US law , he committed a crime .
Defending this asshat is misguided at best .
If i were AQ , this would be my new tactic .
" I 'm in yr arprt , bmb'n yr * $ !
LoL " . Tweet that over and over until they stop responding... them " KA-BOOM " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like a case of endangering others (clear and present danger) and wasting public resources.
Those cops could have been doing other things.
Having lived in a place where bomb threats happened and bombs actually happened... i see no reason this dick should be treated nicely.
Under US law, he committed a crime.
Defending this asshat is misguided at best.
If i were AQ, this would be my new tactic.
"I'm in yr arprt, bmb'n yr *$!
LoL".  Tweet that over and over until they stop responding... them "KA-BOOM".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806864</id>
	<title>Re:Living in fear</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1263822840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure where you get the idea "lazy pigs" were "fishing for leads on twitter" but you're example is what cops would term being a smart arse. There is an unofficial procedure cops have for dealing with smart arses. I have no doubt that one day you will find out what that procedure is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure where you get the idea " lazy pigs " were " fishing for leads on twitter " but you 're example is what cops would term being a smart arse .
There is an unofficial procedure cops have for dealing with smart arses .
I have no doubt that one day you will find out what that procedure is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure where you get the idea "lazy pigs" were "fishing for leads on twitter" but you're example is what cops would term being a smart arse.
There is an unofficial procedure cops have for dealing with smart arses.
I have no doubt that one day you will find out what that procedure is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811602</id>
	<title>Why do we know?</title>
	<author>onecrane</author>
	<datestamp>1263847860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What was the source of this story? Who reported it?</p><p>Some years ago, an acquaintance of mine in college was arrested by the TSA and interrogated for taking photos of airplanes taking off from the local airport. Despite being able to provide every form of ID known to man, as well as the contact information for his teacher who knew he was doing the project, they continually claimed that they had checked out his story and found him to be a liar. They held him for four hours before releasing him. I thought, as he told me this, that there must have been some mistake, until his teacher confirmed that he had never been contacted about it.</p><p>Okay, so that's the TSA, they're idiots, fine. But that story didn't make headlines, and that was much closer to 9/11, when the fear was more substantial. This one did make headlines, and it doesn't paint the authorities in a good light. Normally, terror suspect articles make world headlines and are packed with the evidence against the suspects, something to make it at least look like they found a real terrorist for once, something to reinforce the protector-hero image.</p><p>This story, on the other hand, paints the police as tyrants, for which authorities around the world will be increasingly despised and feared. Very few will read this article and feel more safe, and many will be afraid to decry it too publicly for fear that they might be next. Taken as it's written, therefore, the effect of this article is to create tyranny by way of perception, even though the event itself is not extraordinary.</p><p>So the question is - how did it get to us? The event happened, fine, but how did it get to the news room floor, and what transformation did it undergo in becoming this article? Who wants us to be scared? The only people I can think of are tyrants, and people who are very afraid of tyrants. Which one is acting in this case?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What was the source of this story ?
Who reported it ? Some years ago , an acquaintance of mine in college was arrested by the TSA and interrogated for taking photos of airplanes taking off from the local airport .
Despite being able to provide every form of ID known to man , as well as the contact information for his teacher who knew he was doing the project , they continually claimed that they had checked out his story and found him to be a liar .
They held him for four hours before releasing him .
I thought , as he told me this , that there must have been some mistake , until his teacher confirmed that he had never been contacted about it.Okay , so that 's the TSA , they 're idiots , fine .
But that story did n't make headlines , and that was much closer to 9/11 , when the fear was more substantial .
This one did make headlines , and it does n't paint the authorities in a good light .
Normally , terror suspect articles make world headlines and are packed with the evidence against the suspects , something to make it at least look like they found a real terrorist for once , something to reinforce the protector-hero image.This story , on the other hand , paints the police as tyrants , for which authorities around the world will be increasingly despised and feared .
Very few will read this article and feel more safe , and many will be afraid to decry it too publicly for fear that they might be next .
Taken as it 's written , therefore , the effect of this article is to create tyranny by way of perception , even though the event itself is not extraordinary.So the question is - how did it get to us ?
The event happened , fine , but how did it get to the news room floor , and what transformation did it undergo in becoming this article ?
Who wants us to be scared ?
The only people I can think of are tyrants , and people who are very afraid of tyrants .
Which one is acting in this case ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What was the source of this story?
Who reported it?Some years ago, an acquaintance of mine in college was arrested by the TSA and interrogated for taking photos of airplanes taking off from the local airport.
Despite being able to provide every form of ID known to man, as well as the contact information for his teacher who knew he was doing the project, they continually claimed that they had checked out his story and found him to be a liar.
They held him for four hours before releasing him.
I thought, as he told me this, that there must have been some mistake, until his teacher confirmed that he had never been contacted about it.Okay, so that's the TSA, they're idiots, fine.
But that story didn't make headlines, and that was much closer to 9/11, when the fear was more substantial.
This one did make headlines, and it doesn't paint the authorities in a good light.
Normally, terror suspect articles make world headlines and are packed with the evidence against the suspects, something to make it at least look like they found a real terrorist for once, something to reinforce the protector-hero image.This story, on the other hand, paints the police as tyrants, for which authorities around the world will be increasingly despised and feared.
Very few will read this article and feel more safe, and many will be afraid to decry it too publicly for fear that they might be next.
Taken as it's written, therefore, the effect of this article is to create tyranny by way of perception, even though the event itself is not extraordinary.So the question is - how did it get to us?
The event happened, fine, but how did it get to the news room floor, and what transformation did it undergo in becoming this article?
Who wants us to be scared?
The only people I can think of are tyrants, and people who are very afraid of tyrants.
Which one is acting in this case?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936</id>
	<title>Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of the way the world is heading.  As I keep harping on about, and wish the politicians (and the police) would understand.  Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual".<br>By the standard they've set on this, most of the populace should be under arrest by dint of the anti-terror laws, which over here in the UK are draconian, misguided and completely over the top.<br>It really comes to something when we need to worry more about our own police and politicians than we ever would about a terror attack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of the way the world is heading .
As I keep harping on about , and wish the politicians ( and the police ) would understand .
Orwell 's 1984 is a warning , not a " HOWTO manual " .By the standard they 've set on this , most of the populace should be under arrest by dint of the anti-terror laws , which over here in the UK are draconian , misguided and completely over the top.It really comes to something when we need to worry more about our own police and politicians than we ever would about a terror attack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of the way the world is heading.
As I keep harping on about, and wish the politicians (and the police) would understand.
Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual".By the standard they've set on this, most of the populace should be under arrest by dint of the anti-terror laws, which over here in the UK are draconian, misguided and completely over the top.It really comes to something when we need to worry more about our own police and politicians than we ever would about a terror attack.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30825602</id>
	<title>Why is this even a story?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263900420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The guy's an asshole and sould expect to get the book thrown at him. Just because he's a Twitter asshole doesn't make it less of a crime</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy 's an asshole and sould expect to get the book thrown at him .
Just because he 's a Twitter asshole does n't make it less of a crime</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy's an asshole and sould expect to get the book thrown at him.
Just because he's a Twitter asshole doesn't make it less of a crime</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806816</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>wisdom\_brewing</author>
	<datestamp>1263822540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>south parks christmas critters?</htmltext>
<tokenext>south parks christmas critters ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>south parks christmas critters?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806540</id>
	<title>Re:idiot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263819480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid<br>don't even bother with proxy, just don't make bomb threats, it's not smart or funny</i> </p><p>The proxy is a particularly stupid idea - and all too typically geek. If your defenses are breached, you will be approached as a real threat. No more fun and games.</p><p><a href="http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Staten-Island-Teen-Arrested-in-Apple-Store-Bomb-Threat-81371117.html" title="nbcnewyork.com">Staten Island Teen Arrested in Apple Store Bomb Threat</a> [nbcnewyork.com] [Jam 13]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupiddo n't even bother with proxy , just do n't make bomb threats , it 's not smart or funny The proxy is a particularly stupid idea - and all too typically geek .
If your defenses are breached , you will be approached as a real threat .
No more fun and games.Staten Island Teen Arrested in Apple Store Bomb Threat [ nbcnewyork.com ] [ Jam 13 ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupiddon't even bother with proxy, just don't make bomb threats, it's not smart or funny The proxy is a particularly stupid idea - and all too typically geek.
If your defenses are breached, you will be approached as a real threat.
No more fun and games.Staten Island Teen Arrested in Apple Store Bomb Threat [nbcnewyork.com] [Jam 13]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806090</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263814080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sweden?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sweden ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sweden?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807580</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263828420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about the <a href="http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/" title="pirateparty.org.uk" rel="nofollow">Pirate Party UK [pirateparty.org.uk]</a> [pirateparty.org.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the Pirate Party UK [ pirateparty.org.uk ] [ pirateparty.org.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the Pirate Party UK [pirateparty.org.uk] [pirateparty.org.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809186</id>
	<title>What?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263836700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this a bomb threat?  It's not even possible to have oral sex with an entire airport!  Is it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this a bomb threat ?
It 's not even possible to have oral sex with an entire airport !
Is it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this a bomb threat?
It's not even possible to have oral sex with an entire airport!
Is it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809510</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263838140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The internet is serious business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet is serious business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet is serious business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810240</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody in here make any cracks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263841320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes silly remarks are best treated as such.</p><p>Trouble is that Britain today is a sad place run for the benefit of jobsworths, over important security Hitlers, tabloid newspapers(who keeping demanding extra plod) and surveillance camera manufacturers.</p><p>In Britain the remark that Reagan once made about "let's nuke ******" would get you arrested on some rubbish. In Britain you cam get arrested for taking photographs of St Paul's Cathedral.</p><p>What is really sad is that so few of the people of this country can see how pathetic we now are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes silly remarks are best treated as such.Trouble is that Britain today is a sad place run for the benefit of jobsworths , over important security Hitlers , tabloid newspapers ( who keeping demanding extra plod ) and surveillance camera manufacturers.In Britain the remark that Reagan once made about " let 's nuke * * * * * * " would get you arrested on some rubbish .
In Britain you cam get arrested for taking photographs of St Paul 's Cathedral.What is really sad is that so few of the people of this country can see how pathetic we now are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes silly remarks are best treated as such.Trouble is that Britain today is a sad place run for the benefit of jobsworths, over important security Hitlers, tabloid newspapers(who keeping demanding extra plod) and surveillance camera manufacturers.In Britain the remark that Reagan once made about "let's nuke ******" would get you arrested on some rubbish.
In Britain you cam get arrested for taking photographs of St Paul's Cathedral.What is really sad is that so few of the people of this country can see how pathetic we now are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806234</id>
	<title>Re:This happens weekly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263815760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  The environment can adapt to me, thanks, or the environment can fuck off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
The environment can adapt to me , thanks , or the environment can fuck off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
The environment can adapt to me, thanks, or the environment can fuck off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30949148</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>mr exploiter</author>
	<datestamp>1264779660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That the internet is a huge joke to you doesn't mean that nothing in the internet should be taken serious. If you're an adult and people take seriously a threat you made, you should be responsible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That the internet is a huge joke to you does n't mean that nothing in the internet should be taken serious .
If you 're an adult and people take seriously a threat you made , you should be responsible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That the internet is a huge joke to you doesn't mean that nothing in the internet should be taken serious.
If you're an adult and people take seriously a threat you made, you should be responsible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807646</id>
	<title>If this shitty winders box keeps blue-screening...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263828720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>... on me, I'll have all of Seattle nuked from orbit!<p>
Now catch me if you can<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... on me , I 'll have all of Seattle nuked from orbit !
Now catch me if you can : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... on me, I'll have all of Seattle nuked from orbit!
Now catch me if you can :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807418</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>TiberiusMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1263827100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You've pretty much hit the political nail on the head.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've pretty much hit the political nail on the head .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've pretty much hit the political nail on the head.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806764</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>Incredible Elmo</author>
	<datestamp>1263822180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you say makes no sense. I'm against police states and Big Brother as much as the next<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'er, but once a threat, any type of threat, has been made in connection with an airport, government building or anything else of importance, it *must* be investigated. I wouldn't be surprised if the police, during their investigation, already suspected it was just a joke. Nevertheless, they have to do their job (and yes, without violating any rights etc.).</p><p>It would be a sad state of affairs if the police were to receive a tip on a potential crime and would not even investigate, just because "how can anyone think this is serious"? Even sadder is, that this actually does happen...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you say makes no sense .
I 'm against police states and Big Brother as much as the next / .
'er , but once a threat , any type of threat , has been made in connection with an airport , government building or anything else of importance , it * must * be investigated .
I would n't be surprised if the police , during their investigation , already suspected it was just a joke .
Nevertheless , they have to do their job ( and yes , without violating any rights etc .
) .It would be a sad state of affairs if the police were to receive a tip on a potential crime and would not even investigate , just because " how can anyone think this is serious " ?
Even sadder is , that this actually does happen.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you say makes no sense.
I'm against police states and Big Brother as much as the next /.
'er, but once a threat, any type of threat, has been made in connection with an airport, government building or anything else of importance, it *must* be investigated.
I wouldn't be surprised if the police, during their investigation, already suspected it was just a joke.
Nevertheless, they have to do their job (and yes, without violating any rights etc.
).It would be a sad state of affairs if the police were to receive a tip on a potential crime and would not even investigate, just because "how can anyone think this is serious"?
Even sadder is, that this actually does happen...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30814156</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>StickANeedleInMyEye</author>
	<datestamp>1263817380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's sad when the tabloids have more influence on the politicians than the voters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sad when the tabloids have more influence on the politicians than the voters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sad when the tabloids have more influence on the politicians than the voters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811934</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>abigsmurf</author>
	<datestamp>1263806160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The age of consent is 16. The age at which someone is legal for porn is 18. It was an ammendment to the Protection of Children Act 1978 snuck in with the Sexual offences act 2003.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The age of consent is 16 .
The age at which someone is legal for porn is 18 .
It was an ammendment to the Protection of Children Act 1978 snuck in with the Sexual offences act 2003 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The age of consent is 16.
The age at which someone is legal for porn is 18.
It was an ammendment to the Protection of Children Act 1978 snuck in with the Sexual offences act 2003.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808040</id>
	<title>This could all have been avoided</title>
	<author>KnownIssues</author>
	<datestamp>1263830760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...if he had just ended with "j/k" or a smiley.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...if he had just ended with " j/k " or a smiley .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if he had just ended with "j/k" or a smiley.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What are the odds of Britain having a revolution?</p></div><p>I'd settle for a moderate political party to vote for. Take a look at the major choices in England at the next election, and some of the minor parties that have attracted significant public attention:</p><ul>

<li>Labour: Demonstrably clueless, got us into this mess in the first place, willing to ignore court rulings that their policies are illegal, willing to fire scientists who openly say the evidence doesn't support the policy, basically just about the worst of all worlds.</li><li>Conservatives: Change direction faster than a sportsman running up the field, and tend to back big business (and any dubious employment practices, failed business models, and the like that come with it) way too much.</li><li>Liberal Democrats: Actually think we should have more socialism, and the canonical example of politicians thinking that "fair" just means "screwing people who probably aren't going to vote for us anyway".</li><li>Greens: Still trying to pretend they aren't a one-issue party, still with policies that sound nice until you have to deal with the non-environmental consequences.</li><li>UKIP: Some of their policies sound quite respectable, if only I believed they actually meant what they said and weren't just a more socially acceptable BNP.</li><li>BNP: [This entry has been removed by the Godwin filter.]</li></ul><p>Short of founding my own political party or supporting someone else who does, it looks like those are going to be my choices in this constituency at the general election later this year. By the way, I really dislike negative campaigning, and I find it deeply regrettable that the only way I can find to characterise the parties at the moment is by which aspects of their policies I dislike. I'm not sure I've seen a single policy announcement from any of them yet that actually made me nod and think "Yes, that's a good idea, someone should give that a try".</p><p>Our political system seems to have been pushing more and more toward the extremes in recent years, and then each party makes some token grab for the centre ground in the last few months of an election campaign. We're already starting to see this since the new year.</p><p>Maybe someone does need to found a moderate, relatively central party, that advocates realistic policies (and explains why, if those policies are unpalatable), supports the genuinely needy but without subsidising slackers, promotes competition in the markets but without letting big business get away with things just because it's big...? If recent conversations are anything to go by, almost everyone I know would vote for such a party rather than any of the current lot, and taken in isolation you'd probably say the people I know cover a wide spectrum of political opinion!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What are the odds of Britain having a revolution ? I 'd settle for a moderate political party to vote for .
Take a look at the major choices in England at the next election , and some of the minor parties that have attracted significant public attention : Labour : Demonstrably clueless , got us into this mess in the first place , willing to ignore court rulings that their policies are illegal , willing to fire scientists who openly say the evidence does n't support the policy , basically just about the worst of all worlds.Conservatives : Change direction faster than a sportsman running up the field , and tend to back big business ( and any dubious employment practices , failed business models , and the like that come with it ) way too much.Liberal Democrats : Actually think we should have more socialism , and the canonical example of politicians thinking that " fair " just means " screwing people who probably are n't going to vote for us anyway " .Greens : Still trying to pretend they are n't a one-issue party , still with policies that sound nice until you have to deal with the non-environmental consequences.UKIP : Some of their policies sound quite respectable , if only I believed they actually meant what they said and were n't just a more socially acceptable BNP.BNP : [ This entry has been removed by the Godwin filter .
] Short of founding my own political party or supporting someone else who does , it looks like those are going to be my choices in this constituency at the general election later this year .
By the way , I really dislike negative campaigning , and I find it deeply regrettable that the only way I can find to characterise the parties at the moment is by which aspects of their policies I dislike .
I 'm not sure I 've seen a single policy announcement from any of them yet that actually made me nod and think " Yes , that 's a good idea , someone should give that a try " .Our political system seems to have been pushing more and more toward the extremes in recent years , and then each party makes some token grab for the centre ground in the last few months of an election campaign .
We 're already starting to see this since the new year.Maybe someone does need to found a moderate , relatively central party , that advocates realistic policies ( and explains why , if those policies are unpalatable ) , supports the genuinely needy but without subsidising slackers , promotes competition in the markets but without letting big business get away with things just because it 's big... ?
If recent conversations are anything to go by , almost everyone I know would vote for such a party rather than any of the current lot , and taken in isolation you 'd probably say the people I know cover a wide spectrum of political opinion !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are the odds of Britain having a revolution?I'd settle for a moderate political party to vote for.
Take a look at the major choices in England at the next election, and some of the minor parties that have attracted significant public attention:

Labour: Demonstrably clueless, got us into this mess in the first place, willing to ignore court rulings that their policies are illegal, willing to fire scientists who openly say the evidence doesn't support the policy, basically just about the worst of all worlds.Conservatives: Change direction faster than a sportsman running up the field, and tend to back big business (and any dubious employment practices, failed business models, and the like that come with it) way too much.Liberal Democrats: Actually think we should have more socialism, and the canonical example of politicians thinking that "fair" just means "screwing people who probably aren't going to vote for us anyway".Greens: Still trying to pretend they aren't a one-issue party, still with policies that sound nice until you have to deal with the non-environmental consequences.UKIP: Some of their policies sound quite respectable, if only I believed they actually meant what they said and weren't just a more socially acceptable BNP.BNP: [This entry has been removed by the Godwin filter.
]Short of founding my own political party or supporting someone else who does, it looks like those are going to be my choices in this constituency at the general election later this year.
By the way, I really dislike negative campaigning, and I find it deeply regrettable that the only way I can find to characterise the parties at the moment is by which aspects of their policies I dislike.
I'm not sure I've seen a single policy announcement from any of them yet that actually made me nod and think "Yes, that's a good idea, someone should give that a try".Our political system seems to have been pushing more and more toward the extremes in recent years, and then each party makes some token grab for the centre ground in the last few months of an election campaign.
We're already starting to see this since the new year.Maybe someone does need to found a moderate, relatively central party, that advocates realistic policies (and explains why, if those policies are unpalatable), supports the genuinely needy but without subsidising slackers, promotes competition in the markets but without letting big business get away with things just because it's big...?
If recent conversations are anything to go by, almost everyone I know would vote for such a party rather than any of the current lot, and taken in isolation you'd probably say the people I know cover a wide spectrum of political opinion!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806426</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>teh kurisu</author>
	<datestamp>1263818160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not particularly likely, for a variety of different reasons.</p><p>For one, most people attribute most of these problems to the current government, as opposed to the <em>system</em> of government.  There is a general election coming this year and people think that will change things.</p><p>Also, the areas of the UK that have traditionally been most ill-content with the way the country is governed now have devolved parliaments, and are to some degree in charge of their own affairs.  Scotland, for example, has its own control over policing, crime and the legal system, and as a consequence we don't have many of the problems mentioned above.  In most cases, records are removed from our DNA database if a person is found not guilty, for example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not particularly likely , for a variety of different reasons.For one , most people attribute most of these problems to the current government , as opposed to the system of government .
There is a general election coming this year and people think that will change things.Also , the areas of the UK that have traditionally been most ill-content with the way the country is governed now have devolved parliaments , and are to some degree in charge of their own affairs .
Scotland , for example , has its own control over policing , crime and the legal system , and as a consequence we do n't have many of the problems mentioned above .
In most cases , records are removed from our DNA database if a person is found not guilty , for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not particularly likely, for a variety of different reasons.For one, most people attribute most of these problems to the current government, as opposed to the system of government.
There is a general election coming this year and people think that will change things.Also, the areas of the UK that have traditionally been most ill-content with the way the country is governed now have devolved parliaments, and are to some degree in charge of their own affairs.
Scotland, for example, has its own control over policing, crime and the legal system, and as a consequence we don't have many of the problems mentioned above.
In most cases, records are removed from our DNA database if a person is found not guilty, for example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809806</id>
	<title>Re:I see another headline . . .</title>
	<author>LMacG</author>
	<datestamp>1263839340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>+5 Insightful for a Forth joke?  I love this place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 5 Insightful for a Forth joke ?
I love this place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+5 Insightful for a Forth joke?
I love this place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807088</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263824580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The age of consent for heterosexual and homosexual men and women has been 16 in England, Wales and Scotland and 17 in Northern Ireland since 2000. In 2008 Ireland was brought into line with the rest of the UK to make it 16.</p><p>The sole exception from the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is "it is illegal for a person to engage in sexual activity with an individual under the age of 18 if they are in a position of trust in relation to that individual (teacher, warder, carer, guardian, etc)."</p><p>So unless you're a teacher, or those laws are so stupid that you can't depict someone of legal age in an artificial image, you're a little inaccurate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The age of consent for heterosexual and homosexual men and women has been 16 in England , Wales and Scotland and 17 in Northern Ireland since 2000 .
In 2008 Ireland was brought into line with the rest of the UK to make it 16.The sole exception from the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is " it is illegal for a person to engage in sexual activity with an individual under the age of 18 if they are in a position of trust in relation to that individual ( teacher , warder , carer , guardian , etc ) .
" So unless you 're a teacher , or those laws are so stupid that you ca n't depict someone of legal age in an artificial image , you 're a little inaccurate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The age of consent for heterosexual and homosexual men and women has been 16 in England, Wales and Scotland and 17 in Northern Ireland since 2000.
In 2008 Ireland was brought into line with the rest of the UK to make it 16.The sole exception from the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is "it is illegal for a person to engage in sexual activity with an individual under the age of 18 if they are in a position of trust in relation to that individual (teacher, warder, carer, guardian, etc).
"So unless you're a teacher, or those laws are so stupid that you can't depict someone of legal age in an artificial image, you're a little inaccurate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806602</id>
	<title>His Employers Are Taking This Seriously</title>
	<author>judgecorp</author>
	<datestamp>1263820380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>At eWEEK Europe, we have spoken to his employers, and confirmed that he is <a href="http://www.eweekeurope.co.uk/news/twitter-bomb-joker-arrested-and-suspended-3060" title="eweekeurope.co.uk">suspended from work</a> [eweekeurope.co.uk] for the next couple of weeks. The damage to his work prospects may be the most serious aspect of the story. We await any comment from the company concerned.
Peter Judge</htmltext>
<tokenext>At eWEEK Europe , we have spoken to his employers , and confirmed that he is suspended from work [ eweekeurope.co.uk ] for the next couple of weeks .
The damage to his work prospects may be the most serious aspect of the story .
We await any comment from the company concerned .
Peter Judge</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At eWEEK Europe, we have spoken to his employers, and confirmed that he is suspended from work [eweekeurope.co.uk] for the next couple of weeks.
The damage to his work prospects may be the most serious aspect of the story.
We await any comment from the company concerned.
Peter Judge</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806330</id>
	<title>Terrorists win</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Terrorists win.</p><p>We can't even joke anymore. I don't know how many times I've said I would blow up something when I got pissed off at it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Terrorists win.We ca n't even joke anymore .
I do n't know how many times I 've said I would blow up something when I got pissed off at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terrorists win.We can't even joke anymore.
I don't know how many times I've said I would blow up something when I got pissed off at it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806920</id>
	<title>Re:Living in fear</title>
	<author>bytesex</author>
	<datestamp>1263823200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'You are da bomb baby, and I'm going to totally blow you.'  Well no, not<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/you/.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'You are da bomb baby , and I 'm going to totally blow you .
' Well no , not /you/ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'You are da bomb baby, and I'm going to totally blow you.
'  Well no, not /you/.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807004</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1263823800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, and we live in feat of the fascist police state.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , and we live in feat of the fascist police state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, and we live in feat of the fascist police state.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806368</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263817620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>However, if the bloke in question had boarded a plane with a bomb and the police or whoever had ignored this tweet, the press and public would crucify them.  They really can't win.</p><p>Stupid media is to blame mostly for this "everything MUST be sensationalist" (and generally inaccurate) attitude we take today.</p><p>The facts are always lost or ignored in favour of some juicy, yet wholly irrelevant detail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However , if the bloke in question had boarded a plane with a bomb and the police or whoever had ignored this tweet , the press and public would crucify them .
They really ca n't win.Stupid media is to blame mostly for this " everything MUST be sensationalist " ( and generally inaccurate ) attitude we take today.The facts are always lost or ignored in favour of some juicy , yet wholly irrelevant detail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, if the bloke in question had boarded a plane with a bomb and the police or whoever had ignored this tweet, the press and public would crucify them.
They really can't win.Stupid media is to blame mostly for this "everything MUST be sensationalist" (and generally inaccurate) attitude we take today.The facts are always lost or ignored in favour of some juicy, yet wholly irrelevant detail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263815040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights. And if you were drunk and shouted "I'm going to kill you", you'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights .
And if you were drunk and shouted " I 'm going to kill you " , you 'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights.
And if you were drunk and shouted "I'm going to kill you", you'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805980</id>
	<title>Re:This happens weekly</title>
	<author>LingNoi</author>
	<datestamp>1263812580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language.</p></div></blockquote><p>You seemed to not have even read the summary. Could I suggest reading the part about the guy making a joke on twitter. Could I also suggest reading the twitter comment he made about said Airport being closed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language.You seemed to not have even read the summary .
Could I suggest reading the part about the guy making a joke on twitter .
Could I also suggest reading the twitter comment he made about said Airport being closed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language.You seemed to not have even read the summary.
Could I suggest reading the part about the guy making a joke on twitter.
Could I also suggest reading the twitter comment he made about said Airport being closed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806446</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>MrMr</author>
	<datestamp>1263818460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The felony was making a threat.
<br>It's not the DA (or in this case the CP) who has gone mad, it's the law-makers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The felony was making a threat .
It 's not the DA ( or in this case the CP ) who has gone mad , it 's the law-makers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The felony was making a threat.
It's not the DA (or in this case the CP) who has gone mad, it's the law-makers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810656</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263843360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of course if his threat had actually been real and the police had ignored it then the hue and cry would be around how the authorities could have been so stupid that they could have allowed this happen</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of course if his threat had actually been real and the police had ignored it then the hue and cry would be around how the authorities could have been so stupid that they could have allowed this happen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of course if his threat had actually been real and the police had ignored it then the hue and cry would be around how the authorities could have been so stupid that they could have allowed this happen</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807822</id>
	<title>French arrest receiver of private emailed threat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263829620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was a worse case in France a year or so ago.   A man, annoyed at a train he was riding, emailed a threat to a friend about doing something illegal to the train.    The friend read the private email, figured correctly that it wasn't serious, and ignored it.  The police arrested the recipient and held him for 24 hours on the crime of not reporting the threat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was a worse case in France a year or so ago .
A man , annoyed at a train he was riding , emailed a threat to a friend about doing something illegal to the train .
The friend read the private email , figured correctly that it was n't serious , and ignored it .
The police arrested the recipient and held him for 24 hours on the crime of not reporting the threat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was a worse case in France a year or so ago.
A man, annoyed at a train he was riding, emailed a threat to a friend about doing something illegal to the train.
The friend read the private email, figured correctly that it wasn't serious, and ignored it.
The police arrested the recipient and held him for 24 hours on the crime of not reporting the threat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Twisted Willie</author>
	<datestamp>1263812100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think the most troubling part of what happened is that this guy didn't try to ensure his anonimity.<br> <br>

He didn't intend to make a bombthreat, hell, he didn't even make one. The fact that all hell breaks loose over something silly as this shows that the terrorists have won. Western society lives in fear, whether you like it or not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think the most troubling part of what happened is that this guy did n't try to ensure his anonimity .
He did n't intend to make a bombthreat , hell , he did n't even make one .
The fact that all hell breaks loose over something silly as this shows that the terrorists have won .
Western society lives in fear , whether you like it or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think the most troubling part of what happened is that this guy didn't try to ensure his anonimity.
He didn't intend to make a bombthreat, hell, he didn't even make one.
The fact that all hell breaks loose over something silly as this shows that the terrorists have won.
Western society lives in fear, whether you like it or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806636</id>
	<title>Dumb vs. Stupid</title>
	<author>mseeger</author>
	<datestamp>1263820860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While the police action did not speak for much common sense and understanding of modern communication, neither does the Twitter posting speak of intelligence of the poster. Saying "You got one week to get your shit together or i will blow you sky high" can be interpreted wrongly and IMHO you have to be quite dumb to make such jokes in public.</p><p>I think both parties involved have trouble with Twitter. The police had no method of putting that posting into a context. They interpreted it as a standalone message. The poster did not care, how that statement looks as a standalone message. For him his own Twitter context was applied automagically.</p><p>While i put quite some blame on the police, i do not think the poster is free of it. Been questioned for several hours seems to be fair for that. But being suspended from the job and banned for life from that airport is very excessive IMHO.</p><p>CU, Martin</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While the police action did not speak for much common sense and understanding of modern communication , neither does the Twitter posting speak of intelligence of the poster .
Saying " You got one week to get your shit together or i will blow you sky high " can be interpreted wrongly and IMHO you have to be quite dumb to make such jokes in public.I think both parties involved have trouble with Twitter .
The police had no method of putting that posting into a context .
They interpreted it as a standalone message .
The poster did not care , how that statement looks as a standalone message .
For him his own Twitter context was applied automagically.While i put quite some blame on the police , i do not think the poster is free of it .
Been questioned for several hours seems to be fair for that .
But being suspended from the job and banned for life from that airport is very excessive IMHO.CU , Martin</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the police action did not speak for much common sense and understanding of modern communication, neither does the Twitter posting speak of intelligence of the poster.
Saying "You got one week to get your shit together or i will blow you sky high" can be interpreted wrongly and IMHO you have to be quite dumb to make such jokes in public.I think both parties involved have trouble with Twitter.
The police had no method of putting that posting into a context.
They interpreted it as a standalone message.
The poster did not care, how that statement looks as a standalone message.
For him his own Twitter context was applied automagically.While i put quite some blame on the police, i do not think the poster is free of it.
Been questioned for several hours seems to be fair for that.
But being suspended from the job and banned for life from that airport is very excessive IMHO.CU, Martin</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806262</id>
	<title>Finally an XKCD joke that does not exist yet.</title>
	<author>Errol backfiring</author>
	<datestamp>1263816060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Draw two stickpeople having sex, label one of them as being 17, you guessed it, you're a sex offender.</p> </div><p>and probably won't</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Draw two stickpeople having sex , label one of them as being 17 , you guessed it , you 're a sex offender .
and probably wo n't</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Draw two stickpeople having sex, label one of them as being 17, you guessed it, you're a sex offender.
and probably won't
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly, I'm not sure which side I'm on. The guy makes a joke on twitter, which is public and made for raw information without context. It is akin to write a tag saying the same thing in front of the airport. It is normal for police to investigate, I really don't blame them there. They quickly saw there was nothing to it. I prefer to criticize the airport (who banned the man for life) and his company which suspended him for a lack of common sense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I 'm not sure which side I 'm on .
The guy makes a joke on twitter , which is public and made for raw information without context .
It is akin to write a tag saying the same thing in front of the airport .
It is normal for police to investigate , I really do n't blame them there .
They quickly saw there was nothing to it .
I prefer to criticize the airport ( who banned the man for life ) and his company which suspended him for a lack of common sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I'm not sure which side I'm on.
The guy makes a joke on twitter, which is public and made for raw information without context.
It is akin to write a tag saying the same thing in front of the airport.
It is normal for police to investigate, I really don't blame them there.
They quickly saw there was nothing to it.
I prefer to criticize the airport (who banned the man for life) and his company which suspended him for a lack of common sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806286</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263816300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With an election looming it would be nice to see some of these issues on the agenda, why aren't they?</p><p>No-one seems to care.</p><p>The Tories say they are opposed to compulsory ID cards but only because of cost not for any civil liberty reasons.</p><p>The only party that seems to be against all this is the Lib Dems, their leader (whoever he is) saying he'd go to jail than carry an ID card.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With an election looming it would be nice to see some of these issues on the agenda , why are n't they ? No-one seems to care.The Tories say they are opposed to compulsory ID cards but only because of cost not for any civil liberty reasons.The only party that seems to be against all this is the Lib Dems , their leader ( whoever he is ) saying he 'd go to jail than carry an ID card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With an election looming it would be nice to see some of these issues on the agenda, why aren't they?No-one seems to care.The Tories say they are opposed to compulsory ID cards but only because of cost not for any civil liberty reasons.The only party that seems to be against all this is the Lib Dems, their leader (whoever he is) saying he'd go to jail than carry an ID card.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807170</id>
	<title>Re:Dissent</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1263825300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Depends on what you mean by serious.<br> <br>
Making a bomb threat is a crime in itself even if there's no intent to plant a bomb.  Was he intentionally making a bomb threat?  Most likely not.  Is it actually possible that he intended this to be taken seriously?  It's certainly possible.  Unlikely but possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends on what you mean by serious .
Making a bomb threat is a crime in itself even if there 's no intent to plant a bomb .
Was he intentionally making a bomb threat ?
Most likely not .
Is it actually possible that he intended this to be taken seriously ?
It 's certainly possible .
Unlikely but possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends on what you mean by serious.
Making a bomb threat is a crime in itself even if there's no intent to plant a bomb.
Was he intentionally making a bomb threat?
Most likely not.
Is it actually possible that he intended this to be taken seriously?
It's certainly possible.
Unlikely but possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810370</id>
	<title>Re:Typical..</title>
	<author>mhajicek</author>
	<datestamp>1263841980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual".</p></div><p>You should sell bumper stickers.  You might get arrested for dissent though...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Orwell 's 1984 is a warning , not a " HOWTO manual " .You should sell bumper stickers .
You might get arrested for dissent though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual".You should sell bumper stickers.
You might get arrested for dissent though...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808184</id>
	<title>Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263831540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>or perhaps wait for the fifth of november<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div></blockquote><p>Is that a threat?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>or perhaps wait for the fifth of november : ) Is that a threat ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or perhaps wait for the fifth of november :)Is that a threat?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806218</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808562</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>dylan\_-</author>
	<datestamp>1263833640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since you kind of like UKIP ideas, but not the racism, what about the <a href="http://www.englishdemocrats.org.uk/" title="englishdemocrats.org.uk">English Democrats?</a> [englishdemocrats.org.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since you kind of like UKIP ideas , but not the racism , what about the English Democrats ?
[ englishdemocrats.org.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since you kind of like UKIP ideas, but not the racism, what about the English Democrats?
[englishdemocrats.org.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30814156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30949148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30812858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30817318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30812362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0738253_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808138
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806344
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808792
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807418
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807808
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807796
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810308
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808562
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807580
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806042
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806090
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806140
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807088
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30817318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30814156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807048
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806286
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805934
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806742
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806974
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807524
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805964
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806494
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806978
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806686
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806172
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806218
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808184
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808044
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806604
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808132
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811756
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807056
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807802
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806108
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806864
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807762
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806680
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806234
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809070
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30812858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808838
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806170
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809032
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807124
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807214
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806186
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807328
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30949148
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30812362
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30810370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805990
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807964
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30811576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30805882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30807780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30809806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30806356
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0738253.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0738253.30808998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
