<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_04_0144233</id>
	<title>UK Government Crowd-Sourcing Censorship</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1265281020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/" rel="nofollow">angry tapir</a> writes <i>"The UK public can <a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/334806">report 'terrorism-related' Web sites</a> to authorities for removal from the Internet under a new program launched by the British government. The program is a way in which the government is seeking to enforce the Terrorism Acts of 2000 and 2006. These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists, and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>angry tapir writes " The UK public can report 'terrorism-related ' Web sites to authorities for removal from the Internet under a new program launched by the British government .
The program is a way in which the government is seeking to enforce the Terrorism Acts of 2000 and 2006 .
These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists , and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>angry tapir writes "The UK public can report 'terrorism-related' Web sites to authorities for removal from the Internet under a new program launched by the British government.
The program is a way in which the government is seeking to enforce the Terrorism Acts of 2000 and 2006.
These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists, and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025194</id>
	<title>Re:Please, for the love of Dog</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265312460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022062</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1265297820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt.</i></p><p>Adapt to what? I'm British and lived here all my life, and I'm not going to "adapt" to be like a BNP supporter...</p><p>I strongly disagree that the Government should do what the BNP wants, just because the BNP might respond violently in future. How is that any different to giving into the religious terrorists?</p><p><i>The political correctness of the British government </i></p><p>What political correctness?</p><p>There are concerns about religious fundamentalism, sure. We still have Church leaders given seats in the House of Lords, and a Government that supports segregation via faith schools. But no, you were probably only talking about one particular religion?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites ca n't : you ca n't have two nations living inside the same country , especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who wo n't adapt.Adapt to what ?
I 'm British and lived here all my life , and I 'm not going to " adapt " to be like a BNP supporter...I strongly disagree that the Government should do what the BNP wants , just because the BNP might respond violently in future .
How is that any different to giving into the religious terrorists ? The political correctness of the British government What political correctness ? There are concerns about religious fundamentalism , sure .
We still have Church leaders given seats in the House of Lords , and a Government that supports segregation via faith schools .
But no , you were probably only talking about one particular religion ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt.Adapt to what?
I'm British and lived here all my life, and I'm not going to "adapt" to be like a BNP supporter...I strongly disagree that the Government should do what the BNP wants, just because the BNP might respond violently in future.
How is that any different to giving into the religious terrorists?The political correctness of the British government What political correctness?There are concerns about religious fundamentalism, sure.
We still have Church leaders given seats in the House of Lords, and a Government that supports segregation via faith schools.
But no, you were probably only talking about one particular religion?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020812</id>
	<title>Perspective</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265288880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, so it's still nigh on impossible to report phishing sites and malware-ridden adverts -- things which DO have a tangible negative impact on people -- to the authorities, but everyone is encouraged to take action against a mythical drummed-up threat which impacts almost nobody in this country?</p><p>Im so fucking sick of this shit. Is it too much effort to protect us from REAL threats?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , so it 's still nigh on impossible to report phishing sites and malware-ridden adverts -- things which DO have a tangible negative impact on people -- to the authorities , but everyone is encouraged to take action against a mythical drummed-up threat which impacts almost nobody in this country ? Im so fucking sick of this shit .
Is it too much effort to protect us from REAL threats ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, so it's still nigh on impossible to report phishing sites and malware-ridden adverts -- things which DO have a tangible negative impact on people -- to the authorities, but everyone is encouraged to take action against a mythical drummed-up threat which impacts almost nobody in this country?Im so fucking sick of this shit.
Is it too much effort to protect us from REAL threats?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024562</id>
	<title>We lost the war on terrorism...</title>
	<author>joeyblades</author>
	<datestamp>1265309520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the minute we started behaving differently.
</p><p>
The point of terrorism is to use fear to negatively influence the behavior of the masses.
</p><p>
The more we try to protect ourselves from terrorism, the more freedoms we lose and the more the terrorists win. The result is a disturbing version of the Streisand Effect.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... the minute we started behaving differently .
The point of terrorism is to use fear to negatively influence the behavior of the masses .
The more we try to protect ourselves from terrorism , the more freedoms we lose and the more the terrorists win .
The result is a disturbing version of the Streisand Effect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... the minute we started behaving differently.
The point of terrorism is to use fear to negatively influence the behavior of the masses.
The more we try to protect ourselves from terrorism, the more freedoms we lose and the more the terrorists win.
The result is a disturbing version of the Streisand Effect.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020976</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265290620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Terrorists nead to eat and drink too, so any information pointing to nearby shops is already 'useful to terrorists'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Terrorists nead to eat and drink too , so any information pointing to nearby shops is already 'useful to terrorists' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terrorists nead to eat and drink too, so any information pointing to nearby shops is already 'useful to terrorists'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020666</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265286660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder how many things are removed from the Internet that we simply don't get to hear about...</p><p>Sure, there are high-profile cases in which it backfires and causes the offending material to be spread far and wide, but I'd be willing to bet that that happens in a tiny minority of the cases, and that in the rest, almost no-one not directly involved ever even knows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how many things are removed from the Internet that we simply do n't get to hear about...Sure , there are high-profile cases in which it backfires and causes the offending material to be spread far and wide , but I 'd be willing to bet that that happens in a tiny minority of the cases , and that in the rest , almost no-one not directly involved ever even knows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how many things are removed from the Internet that we simply don't get to hear about...Sure, there are high-profile cases in which it backfires and causes the offending material to be spread far and wide, but I'd be willing to bet that that happens in a tiny minority of the cases, and that in the rest, almost no-one not directly involved ever even knows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</id>
	<title>"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265284980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck with that.</p><p>No, seriously, all the best to those making a grand attempt to <em>remove</em> something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more. I imagine you'll have many fun years of failure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck with that.No , seriously , all the best to those making a grand attempt to remove something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more .
I imagine you 'll have many fun years of failure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck with that.No, seriously, all the best to those making a grand attempt to remove something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more.
I imagine you'll have many fun years of failure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021068</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>mSparks43</author>
	<datestamp>1265291400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I submitted:<br>
<a href="http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page281" title="number10.gov.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page281</a> [number10.gov.uk] <br>
and<br>
<a href="http://www.mi6.gov.uk/output/sis-home-welcome.html" title="mi6.gov.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.mi6.gov.uk/output/sis-home-welcome.html</a> [mi6.gov.uk]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I submitted : http : //www.number10.gov.uk/Page281 [ number10.gov.uk ] and http : //www.mi6.gov.uk/output/sis-home-welcome.html [ mi6.gov.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I submitted:
http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page281 [number10.gov.uk] 
and
http://www.mi6.gov.uk/output/sis-home-welcome.html [mi6.gov.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023052</id>
	<title>Back to Reality</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1265302620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>Sebastian Doyle:</b> [<i>reading</i>] "Vote Fascist for a Third Glorious Decade of Total Law Enforcement"?<br><b>Jake Bullet:</b> [<i>reading</i>] "Be a Government Informer. Betray Your Family &amp; Friends. Fabulous Prizes to be Won"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sebastian Doyle : [ reading ] " Vote Fascist for a Third Glorious Decade of Total Law Enforcement " ? Jake Bullet : [ reading ] " Be a Government Informer .
Betray Your Family &amp; Friends .
Fabulous Prizes to be Won " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sebastian Doyle: [reading] "Vote Fascist for a Third Glorious Decade of Total Law Enforcement"?Jake Bullet: [reading] "Be a Government Informer.
Betray Your Family &amp; Friends.
Fabulous Prizes to be Won"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021044</id>
	<title>Re:Me! Me!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265291100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So from the perspective of King Geo.III any websites dealing with the American Revolution would be banned.<br>From a more modern perspective the U.K. doesn't enjoy the right to talk about revolting against their own government.<br>Sometimes we need to remember it's good to live stateside.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So from the perspective of King Geo.III any websites dealing with the American Revolution would be banned.From a more modern perspective the U.K. does n't enjoy the right to talk about revolting against their own government.Sometimes we need to remember it 's good to live stateside .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So from the perspective of King Geo.III any websites dealing with the American Revolution would be banned.From a more modern perspective the U.K. doesn't enjoy the right to talk about revolting against their own government.Sometimes we need to remember it's good to live stateside.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020544</id>
	<title>First Post and Report</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I report <a href="http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=how+to+make+a+bomb&amp;pws=0&amp;hl=en&amp;num=10" title="google.co.uk" rel="nofollow">google</a> [google.co.uk]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I report google [ google.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I report google [google.co.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258</id>
	<title>Please, for the love of Dog</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265293140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could everyone stop it with the "ooh, X is useful to Terrorists, let's ban that!!1!" comments?</p><p>I'm as uncomfortable about some of the ramifications of this law as anyone else here, but the key phrase you're all ignoring is <b>intended to be</b>.</p><p>Wikipedia, the Tube, etc - all useful to terrorists, not intended to be useful to terrorists, not illegal.</p><p>A site enabling people to donate money, time, etc to terrorist causes - useful to terrorists, intended to be useful to terrorists, illegal.</p><p>Now please, by all means rail against the possible civil liberties violations, potential for misuse and abuse, etc, but let's not rewrite the law so it says something other than what it does. Doing so, and complaining about things that are not covered by it only harms otherwise legitimate complaints and concerns and makes those working against it look foolish and thus easier to dismiss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could everyone stop it with the " ooh , X is useful to Terrorists , let 's ban that ! ! 1 !
" comments ? I 'm as uncomfortable about some of the ramifications of this law as anyone else here , but the key phrase you 're all ignoring is intended to be.Wikipedia , the Tube , etc - all useful to terrorists , not intended to be useful to terrorists , not illegal.A site enabling people to donate money , time , etc to terrorist causes - useful to terrorists , intended to be useful to terrorists , illegal.Now please , by all means rail against the possible civil liberties violations , potential for misuse and abuse , etc , but let 's not rewrite the law so it says something other than what it does .
Doing so , and complaining about things that are not covered by it only harms otherwise legitimate complaints and concerns and makes those working against it look foolish and thus easier to dismiss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could everyone stop it with the "ooh, X is useful to Terrorists, let's ban that!!1!
" comments?I'm as uncomfortable about some of the ramifications of this law as anyone else here, but the key phrase you're all ignoring is intended to be.Wikipedia, the Tube, etc - all useful to terrorists, not intended to be useful to terrorists, not illegal.A site enabling people to donate money, time, etc to terrorist causes - useful to terrorists, intended to be useful to terrorists, illegal.Now please, by all means rail against the possible civil liberties violations, potential for misuse and abuse, etc, but let's not rewrite the law so it says something other than what it does.
Doing so, and complaining about things that are not covered by it only harms otherwise legitimate complaints and concerns and makes those working against it look foolish and thus easier to dismiss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020616</id>
	<title>Are they out to make everyone a terrorist?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>H'm, if I go surfing for terrorist websites so I can report them , won't  I just get a visit from men dressed in black with machine guns 'cos they think I'm a terrorsist?</p><p>
&nbsp; I think I'll pass long term incarceration and interrogations aren't really my thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>H 'm , if I go surfing for terrorist websites so I can report them , wo n't I just get a visit from men dressed in black with machine guns 'cos they think I 'm a terrorsist ?
  I think I 'll pass long term incarceration and interrogations are n't really my thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>H'm, if I go surfing for terrorist websites so I can report them , won't  I just get a visit from men dressed in black with machine guns 'cos they think I'm a terrorsist?
  I think I'll pass long term incarceration and interrogations aren't really my thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021362</id>
	<title>Re:I'd like to report New Labour's web site</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265293920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anonymous wants you to get your ass behind a proxy and join the raid!</p><p>Report random websites right now. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous wants you to get your ass behind a proxy and join the raid ! Report random websites right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous wants you to get your ass behind a proxy and join the raid!Report random websites right now. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021992</id>
	<title>wide implications</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265297460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't RTFA, but.</p><p>Wouldn't some people want to give the terrorists information that would change their minds and avert an act of terrorism?  Perhaps some people would want to talk them out of it.  However, in the case of a suicide bomber, this is helping the terrorist.  It saves his life.  So, a website devoted to talking suicide bombers out of killing themselves and others would be intended to be helpful to terrorists.  This would then be illegal.</p><p>Or what about evangelical Christians?  They typically want to convert others to "save" them (read "help" them); I'm sure this includes terrorists.  So, all websites about spreading Christianity are now illegal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't RTFA , but.Would n't some people want to give the terrorists information that would change their minds and avert an act of terrorism ?
Perhaps some people would want to talk them out of it .
However , in the case of a suicide bomber , this is helping the terrorist .
It saves his life .
So , a website devoted to talking suicide bombers out of killing themselves and others would be intended to be helpful to terrorists .
This would then be illegal.Or what about evangelical Christians ?
They typically want to convert others to " save " them ( read " help " them ) ; I 'm sure this includes terrorists .
So , all websites about spreading Christianity are now illegal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't RTFA, but.Wouldn't some people want to give the terrorists information that would change their minds and avert an act of terrorism?
Perhaps some people would want to talk them out of it.
However, in the case of a suicide bomber, this is helping the terrorist.
It saves his life.
So, a website devoted to talking suicide bombers out of killing themselves and others would be intended to be helpful to terrorists.
This would then be illegal.Or what about evangelical Christians?
They typically want to convert others to "save" them (read "help" them); I'm sure this includes terrorists.
So, all websites about spreading Christianity are now illegal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021038</id>
	<title>Re:A fine sentiment!</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1265290980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I know there's a lot of very idealistic and naive libertarians on Slashdot who chafe against anything that would even hint suppressing free flow of information, no matter how objectionable or subversive.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I protest you using "libertarian" to describe someone believing in freedom of speech. "Libertarian" nowadays means completely unregulated capitalism. It has nothing to do with rights or freedoms, except property rights and the freedom from taxes.</p><blockquote><div><p>But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Why do I picture a <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NinetiesAntiHero" title="tvtropes.org">90's anti-hero</a> [tvtropes.org] with an eyepatch and a cigar in his mouth when I read that ?-)</p><blockquote><div><p>Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Nice. It seems that in your worldview, rights and freedoms are optional but obligations are not. Sorry, kiddo, that's not how it works. Law has obligations to me - in the form of guaranteeing me certain rights and freedoms - and <em>in exchange</em>, I have obligation to obey it. Law exists to serve people, not the other way around.</p><blockquote><div><p>I heartily endorse any action taken to crack Islamist heads in the UK.</p></div> </blockquote><p>If you believe that heads need to be cracked, perhaps you should vote for politicians willing to crack them, rather than ones who'll pussyfoot and try to make the problem invisible, which is the only thing banning websites will do.</p><blockquote><div><p>Sometimes, tough choices have to be made, and idealism dispensed with.</p></div> </blockquote><p>And usually those who say that end up taking the path of least resistance out of laziness and cowardice, and then congratulate themselves on their "toughness", by which they mean the willingness to do harm to innocents rather than strength, endurance or courage.</p><p>Nothing's more pathetic than a spineless wimp pretending that slithering over and smothering the weak makes him a tough guy. Except, perhaps, his wannabe fanclub on the Internet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know there 's a lot of very idealistic and naive libertarians on Slashdot who chafe against anything that would even hint suppressing free flow of information , no matter how objectionable or subversive .
I protest you using " libertarian " to describe someone believing in freedom of speech .
" Libertarian " nowadays means completely unregulated capitalism .
It has nothing to do with rights or freedoms , except property rights and the freedom from taxes.But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road , idealism does n't get you very far in the real world .
Why do I picture a 90 's anti-hero [ tvtropes.org ] with an eyepatch and a cigar in his mouth when I read that ? - ) Truth be told , the UK has a large problem with radical , violent , political Islam , and merely pussyfooting around , striving not to offend , and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of " rights " and " freedoms " -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere .
Nice. It seems that in your worldview , rights and freedoms are optional but obligations are not .
Sorry , kiddo , that 's not how it works .
Law has obligations to me - in the form of guaranteeing me certain rights and freedoms - and in exchange , I have obligation to obey it .
Law exists to serve people , not the other way around.I heartily endorse any action taken to crack Islamist heads in the UK .
If you believe that heads need to be cracked , perhaps you should vote for politicians willing to crack them , rather than ones who 'll pussyfoot and try to make the problem invisible , which is the only thing banning websites will do.Sometimes , tough choices have to be made , and idealism dispensed with .
And usually those who say that end up taking the path of least resistance out of laziness and cowardice , and then congratulate themselves on their " toughness " , by which they mean the willingness to do harm to innocents rather than strength , endurance or courage.Nothing 's more pathetic than a spineless wimp pretending that slithering over and smothering the weak makes him a tough guy .
Except , perhaps , his wannabe fanclub on the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know there's a lot of very idealistic and naive libertarians on Slashdot who chafe against anything that would even hint suppressing free flow of information, no matter how objectionable or subversive.
I protest you using "libertarian" to describe someone believing in freedom of speech.
"Libertarian" nowadays means completely unregulated capitalism.
It has nothing to do with rights or freedoms, except property rights and the freedom from taxes.But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world.
Why do I picture a 90's anti-hero [tvtropes.org] with an eyepatch and a cigar in his mouth when I read that ?-)Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.
Nice. It seems that in your worldview, rights and freedoms are optional but obligations are not.
Sorry, kiddo, that's not how it works.
Law has obligations to me - in the form of guaranteeing me certain rights and freedoms - and in exchange, I have obligation to obey it.
Law exists to serve people, not the other way around.I heartily endorse any action taken to crack Islamist heads in the UK.
If you believe that heads need to be cracked, perhaps you should vote for politicians willing to crack them, rather than ones who'll pussyfoot and try to make the problem invisible, which is the only thing banning websites will do.Sometimes, tough choices have to be made, and idealism dispensed with.
And usually those who say that end up taking the path of least resistance out of laziness and cowardice, and then congratulate themselves on their "toughness", by which they mean the willingness to do harm to innocents rather than strength, endurance or courage.Nothing's more pathetic than a spineless wimp pretending that slithering over and smothering the weak makes him a tough guy.
Except, perhaps, his wannabe fanclub on the Internet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025982</id>
	<title>Lawyers and judges won't like it</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1265317140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They will have fun with the word "intended". British judges, who (thank Pratchett*) are still independent minded, do not take kindly to the Home Office.<p>Basically they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you intended to commit or promote terrorism. Since the Government has locked people up and tried on the argument "we know they plan terrible things but we can't tell you what they are for reasons of State", and m'Lud has responded "Bollocks to that, Jacqui" (or Dave, or whoever was currently disgracing the office of Home Secretary), I remain unconvinced they will get away with this one.</p><p>Here's a thought. I know enough to be able to design quite a good dirty bomb. Lots and lots of people like me also know this. Some could design a really, really good dirty bomb. My current application of my knowledge is to participate in the public consultation on the safety of new nuclear reactors. I'm trying to do my little bit to help prevent a terrorist attack, or indeed a straightforward criminal attack (my own view is that they should not be dignified as "terrorists" - they are simply violent criminals). Mr. Plod is not going to feel my collar. Unlike Peter Mandelson and his Government, Mr. Plod is not stupid.</p><p>*As a good atheist I feel justified in substituting the name of the best-known UK theorist of religion in this phrase.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They will have fun with the word " intended " .
British judges , who ( thank Pratchett * ) are still independent minded , do not take kindly to the Home Office.Basically they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you intended to commit or promote terrorism .
Since the Government has locked people up and tried on the argument " we know they plan terrible things but we ca n't tell you what they are for reasons of State " , and m'Lud has responded " Bollocks to that , Jacqui " ( or Dave , or whoever was currently disgracing the office of Home Secretary ) , I remain unconvinced they will get away with this one.Here 's a thought .
I know enough to be able to design quite a good dirty bomb .
Lots and lots of people like me also know this .
Some could design a really , really good dirty bomb .
My current application of my knowledge is to participate in the public consultation on the safety of new nuclear reactors .
I 'm trying to do my little bit to help prevent a terrorist attack , or indeed a straightforward criminal attack ( my own view is that they should not be dignified as " terrorists " - they are simply violent criminals ) .
Mr. Plod is not going to feel my collar .
Unlike Peter Mandelson and his Government , Mr. Plod is not stupid .
* As a good atheist I feel justified in substituting the name of the best-known UK theorist of religion in this phrase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will have fun with the word "intended".
British judges, who (thank Pratchett*) are still independent minded, do not take kindly to the Home Office.Basically they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you intended to commit or promote terrorism.
Since the Government has locked people up and tried on the argument "we know they plan terrible things but we can't tell you what they are for reasons of State", and m'Lud has responded "Bollocks to that, Jacqui" (or Dave, or whoever was currently disgracing the office of Home Secretary), I remain unconvinced they will get away with this one.Here's a thought.
I know enough to be able to design quite a good dirty bomb.
Lots and lots of people like me also know this.
Some could design a really, really good dirty bomb.
My current application of my knowledge is to participate in the public consultation on the safety of new nuclear reactors.
I'm trying to do my little bit to help prevent a terrorist attack, or indeed a straightforward criminal attack (my own view is that they should not be dignified as "terrorists" - they are simply violent criminals).
Mr. Plod is not going to feel my collar.
Unlike Peter Mandelson and his Government, Mr. Plod is not stupid.
*As a good atheist I feel justified in substituting the name of the best-known UK theorist of religion in this phrase.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024560</id>
	<title>RIAA</title>
	<author>jvillain</author>
	<datestamp>1265309520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't the RIAA a terrorist organization?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the RIAA a terrorist organization ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the RIAA a terrorist organization?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022028</id>
	<title>The elites can see it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265297640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The elites can see it but don't care. A billionaire Muslim has more in common with a billionaire Jew than with the plebs of any religious persuasion who do the work.</p><p>What do they care if the poor (you're poor in this context) squabble amongst themselves and kill each other, so long as they are competing for work and bringing down labour costs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The elites can see it but do n't care .
A billionaire Muslim has more in common with a billionaire Jew than with the plebs of any religious persuasion who do the work.What do they care if the poor ( you 're poor in this context ) squabble amongst themselves and kill each other , so long as they are competing for work and bringing down labour costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The elites can see it but don't care.
A billionaire Muslim has more in common with a billionaire Jew than with the plebs of any religious persuasion who do the work.What do they care if the poor (you're poor in this context) squabble amongst themselves and kill each other, so long as they are competing for work and bringing down labour costs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020974</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1265290560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Note that it's not a government-mandated censor, it's opt-in by ISPs and run by a non-government organisation (the Internet Watch Foundation, which seems to have no mandate and no accountability).  Some ISPs don't opt in, so you get full uncensored access, although the large ones do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Note that it 's not a government-mandated censor , it 's opt-in by ISPs and run by a non-government organisation ( the Internet Watch Foundation , which seems to have no mandate and no accountability ) .
Some ISPs do n't opt in , so you get full uncensored access , although the large ones do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note that it's not a government-mandated censor, it's opt-in by ISPs and run by a non-government organisation (the Internet Watch Foundation, which seems to have no mandate and no accountability).
Some ISPs don't opt in, so you get full uncensored access, although the large ones do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022702</id>
	<title>Re:Did you read the footnote?</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1265300940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We're all information criminals already, so why stop at MP3s?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're all information criminals already , so why stop at MP3s ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're all information criminals already, so why stop at MP3s?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020850</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1265289240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yep. Its all very well working from the Stasis operating manual, but they didn't have to contend with modern information technology...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep .
Its all very well working from the Stasis operating manual , but they did n't have to contend with modern information technology.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep.
Its all very well working from the Stasis operating manual, but they didn't have to contend with modern information technology...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020718</id>
	<title>Circular logic apply?</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1265287380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Usama Bin Laden have proved that terrorism is infact a very succesful tool. This law alone proves that it works just as intended. If the goal is to tighten the screws on your opponents population and make their life living 1984 i cant think of a better way. I find it very amusing that someone crate a law that proves that terrorism works just dandy and at the same time forbid anyone to speak about it.</p><p>I dont condone terrorism but it sure seems to work very well for some tasks. The US has a public perception of being evil and we westerners are now monitored, searched, scanned, Without free speech and controlled in any way possible.</p><p>The best we could have done was to gotten to the core of the problem, why do terrorists exist, what do they want? How do we go about getting rid of them peacefully, take away their reasons to commit terrorist acts and thus support from the general population?</p><p>As of now we just wander straight into the trap waving a big sign against the terrorists "Do it again! It works!" while we all loose essential human rights one after another.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Usama Bin Laden have proved that terrorism is infact a very succesful tool .
This law alone proves that it works just as intended .
If the goal is to tighten the screws on your opponents population and make their life living 1984 i cant think of a better way .
I find it very amusing that someone crate a law that proves that terrorism works just dandy and at the same time forbid anyone to speak about it.I dont condone terrorism but it sure seems to work very well for some tasks .
The US has a public perception of being evil and we westerners are now monitored , searched , scanned , Without free speech and controlled in any way possible.The best we could have done was to gotten to the core of the problem , why do terrorists exist , what do they want ?
How do we go about getting rid of them peacefully , take away their reasons to commit terrorist acts and thus support from the general population ? As of now we just wander straight into the trap waving a big sign against the terrorists " Do it again !
It works !
" while we all loose essential human rights one after another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usama Bin Laden have proved that terrorism is infact a very succesful tool.
This law alone proves that it works just as intended.
If the goal is to tighten the screws on your opponents population and make their life living 1984 i cant think of a better way.
I find it very amusing that someone crate a law that proves that terrorism works just dandy and at the same time forbid anyone to speak about it.I dont condone terrorism but it sure seems to work very well for some tasks.
The US has a public perception of being evil and we westerners are now monitored, searched, scanned, Without free speech and controlled in any way possible.The best we could have done was to gotten to the core of the problem, why do terrorists exist, what do they want?
How do we go about getting rid of them peacefully, take away their reasons to commit terrorist acts and thus support from the general population?As of now we just wander straight into the trap waving a big sign against the terrorists "Do it again!
It works!
" while we all loose essential human rights one after another.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540</id>
	<title>Me! Me!</title>
	<author>Thanshin</author>
	<datestamp>1265284980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hereby report "slashdot.org".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hereby report " slashdot.org " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hereby report "slashdot.org".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021008</id>
	<title>Extra restrictions during election times.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265290800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>what implications to freedoms this may have on non-violent polictical protest sites i.e. any site that may critise a governments policy</p></div><p>You need to read an article from <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/03/uk\_election\_law/" title="theregister.co.uk">The Register</a> [theregister.co.uk] which points out that a LOT of the restrictions which apply to print media could be used to limit web-speech during a general election.
</p><p>
The only reason we still appear to have a more-or-less free society is that the government (whichever colour we have/will-have) have not yet chosen to enforce the laws they have already put in place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>what implications to freedoms this may have on non-violent polictical protest sites i.e .
any site that may critise a governments policyYou need to read an article from The Register [ theregister.co.uk ] which points out that a LOT of the restrictions which apply to print media could be used to limit web-speech during a general election .
The only reason we still appear to have a more-or-less free society is that the government ( whichever colour we have/will-have ) have not yet chosen to enforce the laws they have already put in place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what implications to freedoms this may have on non-violent polictical protest sites i.e.
any site that may critise a governments policyYou need to read an article from The Register [theregister.co.uk] which points out that a LOT of the restrictions which apply to print media could be used to limit web-speech during a general election.
The only reason we still appear to have a more-or-less free society is that the government (whichever colour we have/will-have) have not yet chosen to enforce the laws they have already put in place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021066</id>
	<title>Not Crowdsourcing!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265291400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Calm down. This allows to report a website for investigation - it does <i>not</i> allow you some sort of final say on whether it's illegal or not - that decision, as before, is made by the Home Office. This is no different to calling the police if you see someone suspicious. The police make the final judgement on whether they're acting illegally or not. How valid that judgement is, of course, is another matter....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Calm down .
This allows to report a website for investigation - it does not allow you some sort of final say on whether it 's illegal or not - that decision , as before , is made by the Home Office .
This is no different to calling the police if you see someone suspicious .
The police make the final judgement on whether they 're acting illegally or not .
How valid that judgement is , of course , is another matter... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Calm down.
This allows to report a website for investigation - it does not allow you some sort of final say on whether it's illegal or not - that decision, as before, is made by the Home Office.
This is no different to calling the police if you see someone suspicious.
The police make the final judgement on whether they're acting illegally or not.
How valid that judgement is, of course, is another matter....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022306</id>
	<title>ohoh!</title>
	<author>e-scetic</author>
	<datestamp>1265299020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hereby report the UK government</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hereby report the UK government</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hereby report the UK government</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022460</id>
	<title>"Intended"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265299800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least in the US the "Patriot Act" was "Intended" to be used against terrorists.  Instead I believe it has been estimated that 50\%-80\% of its use is against everyday crime.  It has even been used against "dissidents" who's only "crime" was questioning the actions of the government (Professors being harrassed at airports anyone).  "Child Porn" laws were "Intended" to be used against people abusing children.  Instead we have case after case where they are used against teenagers for "sexting", ruining their lives just as surely as being abused would have.  History has shown (at least hear in the U.S.) that laws that can be abused, WILL BE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least in the US the " Patriot Act " was " Intended " to be used against terrorists .
Instead I believe it has been estimated that 50 \ % -80 \ % of its use is against everyday crime .
It has even been used against " dissidents " who 's only " crime " was questioning the actions of the government ( Professors being harrassed at airports anyone ) .
" Child Porn " laws were " Intended " to be used against people abusing children .
Instead we have case after case where they are used against teenagers for " sexting " , ruining their lives just as surely as being abused would have .
History has shown ( at least hear in the U.S. ) that laws that can be abused , WILL BE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least in the US the "Patriot Act" was "Intended" to be used against terrorists.
Instead I believe it has been estimated that 50\%-80\% of its use is against everyday crime.
It has even been used against "dissidents" who's only "crime" was questioning the actions of the government (Professors being harrassed at airports anyone).
"Child Porn" laws were "Intended" to be used against people abusing children.
Instead we have case after case where they are used against teenagers for "sexting", ruining their lives just as surely as being abused would have.
History has shown (at least hear in the U.S.) that laws that can be abused, WILL BE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022206</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1265298480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He wasn't called that because of what you say, he was called that because he suggested deporting people based on their views (even though they may be British citizens).</p><p>For heaven's sake, I would have thought that on Slashdot at least there'd be opposition to such thought crimes! Are you going to say the Government's plans are okay, because censoring websites with views it doesn't like is fine? Or is it fine just so long as it doesn't affect you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He was n't called that because of what you say , he was called that because he suggested deporting people based on their views ( even though they may be British citizens ) .For heaven 's sake , I would have thought that on Slashdot at least there 'd be opposition to such thought crimes !
Are you going to say the Government 's plans are okay , because censoring websites with views it does n't like is fine ?
Or is it fine just so long as it does n't affect you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He wasn't called that because of what you say, he was called that because he suggested deporting people based on their views (even though they may be British citizens).For heaven's sake, I would have thought that on Slashdot at least there'd be opposition to such thought crimes!
Are you going to say the Government's plans are okay, because censoring websites with views it doesn't like is fine?
Or is it fine just so long as it doesn't affect you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020848</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265289240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40\% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia.</p><p>And they can! Just not in that particular coutry. Conclusion of the survey: majority of Muslims donotwant Sharia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40 \ % of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia.And they can !
Just not in that particular coutry .
Conclusion of the survey : majority of Muslims donotwant Sharia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40\% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia.And they can!
Just not in that particular coutry.
Conclusion of the survey: majority of Muslims donotwant Sharia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020970</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1265290440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suppose you can't really make something dissapear; but you can make it so obscure that masses are unlikely to stumble upon it.</p><p>A bit Orwellian, you say? Quite fitting, since it's UK...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose you ca n't really make something dissapear ; but you can make it so obscure that masses are unlikely to stumble upon it.A bit Orwellian , you say ?
Quite fitting , since it 's UK.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose you can't really make something dissapear; but you can make it so obscure that masses are unlikely to stumble upon it.A bit Orwellian, you say?
Quite fitting, since it's UK...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024198</id>
	<title>Re:US and UK government are melding</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1265308020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.</i></p><p>Sounds a lot like websites asking to be forwarded phishing emails.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there , spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care .
These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation .
Since we ca n't keep track of all of them here at the White House , we 're asking for your help .
If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy , send it to flag @ whitehouse.gov.Sounds a lot like websites asking to be forwarded phishing emails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care.
These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation.
Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help.
If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.Sounds a lot like websites asking to be forwarded phishing emails.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020628</id>
	<title>New title</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1265286120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a wonderful idea. Let's call the volunteer participants in this program <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi" title="wikipedia.org"> <em>Inoffizielle Mitarbeiter</em> </a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a wonderful idea .
Let 's call the volunteer participants in this program Inoffizielle Mitarbeiter [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a wonderful idea.
Let's call the volunteer participants in this program  Inoffizielle Mitarbeiter  [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021958</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>jhol13</author>
	<datestamp>1265297280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But you were protect against the horrible terrorists in the Icesave case, weren't you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But you were protect against the horrible terrorists in the Icesave case , were n't you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But you were protect against the horrible terrorists in the Icesave case, weren't you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020750</id>
	<title>In all seriousness...</title>
	<author>Grundlefleck</author>
	<datestamp>1265287860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>Content deemed illegal by the U.K. includes videos of beheadings, <b>messages that encourage racial or terrorist violence</b> and chat forums revolving around hate crimes, according to information on Direct.co.uk.</p></div><p>
(emphasis mine)
<br> <br>

YouTube comments, anyone?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : Content deemed illegal by the U.K. includes videos of beheadings , messages that encourage racial or terrorist violence and chat forums revolving around hate crimes , according to information on Direct.co.uk .
( emphasis mine ) YouTube comments , anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA:Content deemed illegal by the U.K. includes videos of beheadings, messages that encourage racial or terrorist violence and chat forums revolving around hate crimes, according to information on Direct.co.uk.
(emphasis mine)
 

YouTube comments, anyone?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022548</id>
	<title>Fox Nation - Terrorist Site</title>
	<author>b3d</author>
	<datestamp>1265300220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fox Nation has plenty of people advocating terrorist activities in the US, against Obama, liberals, gays, blacks, jews, and other classes of people that the wing nuts deem unacceptable.  I guess they'll get blocked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fox Nation has plenty of people advocating terrorist activities in the US , against Obama , liberals , gays , blacks , jews , and other classes of people that the wing nuts deem unacceptable .
I guess they 'll get blocked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fox Nation has plenty of people advocating terrorist activities in the US, against Obama, liberals, gays, blacks, jews, and other classes of people that the wing nuts deem unacceptable.
I guess they'll get blocked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020586</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it'd be great if someone just blew them the fuck up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 'd be great if someone just blew them the fuck up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it'd be great if someone just blew them the fuck up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020604</id>
	<title>Wrong URL.</title>
	<author>onion2k</author>
	<datestamp>1265285700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure that should be <a href="http://ministry\_of\_love.direct.gov.uk/" title="direct.gov.uk">http://ministry\_of\_love.direct.gov.uk/</a> [direct.gov.uk] .</p><p>(If you've not read Orwell: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry\_of\_Love" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry\_of\_Love</a> [wikipedia.org] )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure that should be http : //ministry \ _of \ _love.direct.gov.uk/ [ direct.gov.uk ] .
( If you 've not read Orwell : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry \ _of \ _Love [ wikipedia.org ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure that should be http://ministry\_of\_love.direct.gov.uk/ [direct.gov.uk] .
(If you've not read Orwell: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry\_of\_Love [wikipedia.org] )</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031406</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>seekertom</author>
	<datestamp>1265307240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You speak it well, but I have to ask... do you REALLY believe all this is just a political foible? A dumb move to garner votes?  Moves to appease the masses of prospective voters? Maybe it is all part of a well-orchestrated plan to just smash all our toys and then go home laughing all the way! (I hope you get my meaning hastily hidden under the glibness of metaphor). thanks fer lis'nin'!   seekertom</htmltext>
<tokenext>You speak it well , but I have to ask... do you REALLY believe all this is just a political foible ?
A dumb move to garner votes ?
Moves to appease the masses of prospective voters ?
Maybe it is all part of a well-orchestrated plan to just smash all our toys and then go home laughing all the way !
( I hope you get my meaning hastily hidden under the glibness of metaphor ) .
thanks fer lis'nin ' !
seekertom</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You speak it well, but I have to ask... do you REALLY believe all this is just a political foible?
A dumb move to garner votes?
Moves to appease the masses of prospective voters?
Maybe it is all part of a well-orchestrated plan to just smash all our toys and then go home laughing all the way!
(I hope you get my meaning hastily hidden under the glibness of metaphor).
thanks fer lis'nin'!
seekertom</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021812</id>
	<title>and the link...</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1265296560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... and does supporting protest of actions of the crown count as terrorism?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... and does supporting protest of actions of the crown count as terrorism ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and does supporting protest of actions of the crown count as terrorism?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021298</id>
	<title>/. terrorists</title>
	<author>Dan541</author>
	<datestamp>1265293440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The UK public can report 'terrorism-related' Web sites to authorities for removal from the Internet</p> </div><p>So I assume they are going to post the urls to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The UK public can report 'terrorism-related ' Web sites to authorities for removal from the Internet So I assume they are going to post the urls to / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UK public can report 'terrorism-related' Web sites to authorities for removal from the Internet So I assume they are going to post the urls to /.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020652</id>
	<title>Re:Unclear summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265286420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not quite, from TFA:</p><blockquote><div><p>People can report Web sites on Direct.co.uk by filling out a Web-based form. The form includes categories to describe what's on the Web site, such as "terrorist training material" or "hate crimes."</p></div></blockquote><p>So when we find some<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.co.uk site with instructions on how to take down our infrastructure, we can report it. Although it then goes onto say while basically a good idea, few people who come across actually useful info will know what to do with it, followed by some lawyer quoted with this little gem: </p><p><div class="quote"><p>"I don't think the police anticipate a huge number of submissions."</p></div><p> Now the form seems to have been publicized, maybe he'll be proved wrong?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not quite , from TFA : People can report Web sites on Direct.co.uk by filling out a Web-based form .
The form includes categories to describe what 's on the Web site , such as " terrorist training material " or " hate crimes .
" So when we find some .co.uk site with instructions on how to take down our infrastructure , we can report it .
Although it then goes onto say while basically a good idea , few people who come across actually useful info will know what to do with it , followed by some lawyer quoted with this little gem : " I do n't think the police anticipate a huge number of submissions .
" Now the form seems to have been publicized , maybe he 'll be proved wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not quite, from TFA:People can report Web sites on Direct.co.uk by filling out a Web-based form.
The form includes categories to describe what's on the Web site, such as "terrorist training material" or "hate crimes.
"So when we find some .co.uk site with instructions on how to take down our infrastructure, we can report it.
Although it then goes onto say while basically a good idea, few people who come across actually useful info will know what to do with it, followed by some lawyer quoted with this little gem: "I don't think the police anticipate a huge number of submissions.
" Now the form seems to have been publicized, maybe he'll be proved wrong?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020716</id>
	<title>You really can't say "beware of slipery slope"...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265287380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...after you're already slipping, can you?</p><p>This will a) provide nothing b) will destroy a lot c) won't cure paranoia</p><p>Dear God help us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...after you 're already slipping , can you ? This will a ) provide nothing b ) will destroy a lot c ) wo n't cure paranoiaDear God help us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...after you're already slipping, can you?This will a) provide nothing b) will destroy a lot c) won't cure paranoiaDear God help us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576</id>
	<title>US and UK government are melding</title>
	<author>mykos</author>
	<datestamp>1265285460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Always a horrifying thought, being reported by your neighbors.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; I work with an elderly West German lady.  She was telling me that her East German friends had grown a lifetime of distrust for just about everyone.  Some East Germans that grew up steeped in this mindset still keep new friends at arm's length, even today.</p><p>Also, the story reminded me of this gem:<br><i>There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can&rsquo;t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we&rsquo;re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.</i><br><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/" title="whitehouse.gov">http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/</a> [whitehouse.gov]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Always a horrifying thought , being reported by your neighbors .
    I work with an elderly West German lady .
She was telling me that her East German friends had grown a lifetime of distrust for just about everyone .
Some East Germans that grew up steeped in this mindset still keep new friends at arm 's length , even today.Also , the story reminded me of this gem : There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there , spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care .
These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation .
Since we can    t keep track of all of them here at the White House , we    re asking for your help .
If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy , send it to flag @ whitehouse.gov.http : //www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/ [ whitehouse.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Always a horrifying thought, being reported by your neighbors.
    I work with an elderly West German lady.
She was telling me that her East German friends had grown a lifetime of distrust for just about everyone.
Some East Germans that grew up steeped in this mindset still keep new friends at arm's length, even today.Also, the story reminded me of this gem:There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care.
These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation.
Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help.
If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/ [whitehouse.gov]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031340</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>seekertom</author>
	<datestamp>1265306760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sooooo, where the heck is Red Dwarf now, matey? Usta be one of my favorite shows, right up there with Dr Who! Now, to the important part... my question is this: You are losing it (so are we), but what the hell are you doing about it? Serious problem. Demands serious thought. Requested is a serious answer from you, actually, from ANYONE in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.-land! thanks fer lis'nin'!    seekertom ps remember the episode where the bug was miniaturized and was speeding thru the a/c ducts, and ran up the butt-end of the rat? Close analogy to now, only we're the rat and our respective govts are really cramming it up our collective arses!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sooooo , where the heck is Red Dwarf now , matey ?
Usta be one of my favorite shows , right up there with Dr Who !
Now , to the important part... my question is this : You are losing it ( so are we ) , but what the hell are you doing about it ?
Serious problem .
Demands serious thought .
Requested is a serious answer from you , actually , from ANYONE in /.-land !
thanks fer lis'nin ' !
seekertom ps remember the episode where the bug was miniaturized and was speeding thru the a/c ducts , and ran up the butt-end of the rat ?
Close analogy to now , only we 're the rat and our respective govts are really cramming it up our collective arses !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sooooo, where the heck is Red Dwarf now, matey?
Usta be one of my favorite shows, right up there with Dr Who!
Now, to the important part... my question is this: You are losing it (so are we), but what the hell are you doing about it?
Serious problem.
Demands serious thought.
Requested is a serious answer from you, actually, from ANYONE in /.-land!
thanks fer lis'nin'!
seekertom ps remember the episode where the bug was miniaturized and was speeding thru the a/c ducts, and ran up the butt-end of the rat?
Close analogy to now, only we're the rat and our respective govts are really cramming it up our collective arses!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31044862</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1265462280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I hate to Godwin myself so early on, but I do hope you realise that blatant propaganda against unpopular minorities is how the BNP's historical heroes got themselves into a position of power as well.</p></div></blockquote><p>Some people are unpopular for a reason.</p><p>Honour killings, bombing the underground, and (irony of ironies) their hatred of other minorities seem like pretty good justification to me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to Godwin myself so early on , but I do hope you realise that blatant propaganda against unpopular minorities is how the BNP 's historical heroes got themselves into a position of power as well.Some people are unpopular for a reason.Honour killings , bombing the underground , and ( irony of ironies ) their hatred of other minorities seem like pretty good justification to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to Godwin myself so early on, but I do hope you realise that blatant propaganda against unpopular minorities is how the BNP's historical heroes got themselves into a position of power as well.Some people are unpopular for a reason.Honour killings, bombing the underground, and (irony of ironies) their hatred of other minorities seem like pretty good justification to me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025320</id>
	<title>If we outlaw knoledge...</title>
	<author>VortexCortex</author>
	<datestamp>1265313300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...only outlaws will have knowledge.</p><p>Maps are arguably the most useful source of information for terrorists.<br>How else can they get their bombs to the correct location in a foreign land?</p><p>Explosives can be used by terrorists to harm innocent people.</p><p>Chemistry describes how chemicals react...to create explosions.</p><p>Physics describes how force is applied...during an explosion.</p><p>Math is used extensively to solve formulas...in both Chemistry and Physics.</p><p>Words are used to represent information...that describes how to make bombs.</p><p>Paper is used to convey language...which could describe terrorist actions.</p><p>Food is an important resource...that helps all terrorists survive!</p><p>You don't want to help the terrorists do you?<br>Then, you understand why we're removing all of your surplus food items, writing utensils, books, maps, televisions, and home computers.<br>Do you have a license for those vocal cords?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...only outlaws will have knowledge.Maps are arguably the most useful source of information for terrorists.How else can they get their bombs to the correct location in a foreign land ? Explosives can be used by terrorists to harm innocent people.Chemistry describes how chemicals react...to create explosions.Physics describes how force is applied...during an explosion.Math is used extensively to solve formulas...in both Chemistry and Physics.Words are used to represent information...that describes how to make bombs.Paper is used to convey language...which could describe terrorist actions.Food is an important resource...that helps all terrorists survive ! You do n't want to help the terrorists do you ? Then , you understand why we 're removing all of your surplus food items , writing utensils , books , maps , televisions , and home computers.Do you have a license for those vocal cords ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...only outlaws will have knowledge.Maps are arguably the most useful source of information for terrorists.How else can they get their bombs to the correct location in a foreign land?Explosives can be used by terrorists to harm innocent people.Chemistry describes how chemicals react...to create explosions.Physics describes how force is applied...during an explosion.Math is used extensively to solve formulas...in both Chemistry and Physics.Words are used to represent information...that describes how to make bombs.Paper is used to convey language...which could describe terrorist actions.Food is an important resource...that helps all terrorists survive!You don't want to help the terrorists do you?Then, you understand why we're removing all of your surplus food items, writing utensils, books, maps, televisions, and home computers.Do you have a license for those vocal cords?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31026024</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>Reziac</author>
	<datestamp>1265274120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The site itself will be 'useful to terrorists', once all those reported URLs are compiled into a handy bookmark file...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The site itself will be 'useful to terrorists ' , once all those reported URLs are compiled into a handy bookmark file.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The site itself will be 'useful to terrorists', once all those reported URLs are compiled into a handy bookmark file...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021278</id>
	<title>Re:Me! Me!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265293260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>THATS IT IM BLOWIN SOMES SHIT UP</p><p>stupid caps filter ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>THATS IT IM BLOWIN SOMES SHIT UPstupid caps filter ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THATS IT IM BLOWIN SOMES SHIT UPstupid caps filter ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636</id>
	<title>Did you read the footnote?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265286240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apparently, owning a copy of <i>The Anarchist's Cookbook</i> is a jailable offense. I therefore should report amazon.co.uk who sells it.

And since its not limited to british sites, I am pretty sure I read on wikipedia the mechanics on how thermonuclear weapons work. At least 1940s/1950s era weapons.

In a world where information is criminal, only criminals will have information.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently , owning a copy of The Anarchist 's Cookbook is a jailable offense .
I therefore should report amazon.co.uk who sells it .
And since its not limited to british sites , I am pretty sure I read on wikipedia the mechanics on how thermonuclear weapons work .
At least 1940s/1950s era weapons .
In a world where information is criminal , only criminals will have information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently, owning a copy of The Anarchist's Cookbook is a jailable offense.
I therefore should report amazon.co.uk who sells it.
And since its not limited to british sites, I am pretty sure I read on wikipedia the mechanics on how thermonuclear weapons work.
At least 1940s/1950s era weapons.
In a world where information is criminal, only criminals will have information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022030</id>
	<title>Re:Please, for the love of Dog</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265297640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of the ranting from so called libertarians is just a shallow veneer over purely opportunistic political ambitions. They're not interested in the law, how it's implemented, or any meaningful discussion of liberty. They just want to badmouth the government and scare people so the Conservative party gets a free ride into power. If they were really concerned about liberty in a meaningful way the likes of David Cameron and internet shills like Guido Fawkes would take a much more reasonable line on these issues instead of the tub thumping and intimidation they practice in reality. Indeed, the behaviour of people like the Tories and so-called libertarians is anti-state and anti-social in a way that makes them technically fit within the definition of dictators or terrorists. So, a little more truth and less hypocrisy please. Civilisation doesn't happen by accident.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the ranting from so called libertarians is just a shallow veneer over purely opportunistic political ambitions .
They 're not interested in the law , how it 's implemented , or any meaningful discussion of liberty .
They just want to badmouth the government and scare people so the Conservative party gets a free ride into power .
If they were really concerned about liberty in a meaningful way the likes of David Cameron and internet shills like Guido Fawkes would take a much more reasonable line on these issues instead of the tub thumping and intimidation they practice in reality .
Indeed , the behaviour of people like the Tories and so-called libertarians is anti-state and anti-social in a way that makes them technically fit within the definition of dictators or terrorists .
So , a little more truth and less hypocrisy please .
Civilisation does n't happen by accident .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the ranting from so called libertarians is just a shallow veneer over purely opportunistic political ambitions.
They're not interested in the law, how it's implemented, or any meaningful discussion of liberty.
They just want to badmouth the government and scare people so the Conservative party gets a free ride into power.
If they were really concerned about liberty in a meaningful way the likes of David Cameron and internet shills like Guido Fawkes would take a much more reasonable line on these issues instead of the tub thumping and intimidation they practice in reality.
Indeed, the behaviour of people like the Tories and so-called libertarians is anti-state and anti-social in a way that makes them technically fit within the definition of dictators or terrorists.
So, a little more truth and less hypocrisy please.
Civilisation doesn't happen by accident.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021582</id>
	<title>Re:Me! Me!</title>
	<author>captainpanic</author>
	<datestamp>1265295240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Russia, Websites Report You!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia , Websites Report You !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia, Websites Report You!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</id>
	<title>Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What worries me is the term: 'intended to be useful to terrorists'; this is so broad a definition, in theory anything could be deemed as useful to terrorist. For example, how to fly a plane, how to drive a car, self defense techniques.

It also concerns me what implications to freedoms this may have on non-violent polictical protest sites i.e. any site that may critise a governments policy.

I am a UK citizen and am becoming increasingly worried as my freedoms are being slowly litigated for my 'own good' to combat terrorism.

Reminds me of a joke on Red Dwarf: 'Report your friends, family and neighbours... wonderful prizes to be won.'</htmltext>
<tokenext>What worries me is the term : 'intended to be useful to terrorists ' ; this is so broad a definition , in theory anything could be deemed as useful to terrorist .
For example , how to fly a plane , how to drive a car , self defense techniques .
It also concerns me what implications to freedoms this may have on non-violent polictical protest sites i.e .
any site that may critise a governments policy .
I am a UK citizen and am becoming increasingly worried as my freedoms are being slowly litigated for my 'own good ' to combat terrorism .
Reminds me of a joke on Red Dwarf : 'Report your friends , family and neighbours... wonderful prizes to be won .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What worries me is the term: 'intended to be useful to terrorists'; this is so broad a definition, in theory anything could be deemed as useful to terrorist.
For example, how to fly a plane, how to drive a car, self defense techniques.
It also concerns me what implications to freedoms this may have on non-violent polictical protest sites i.e.
any site that may critise a governments policy.
I am a UK citizen and am becoming increasingly worried as my freedoms are being slowly litigated for my 'own good' to combat terrorism.
Reminds me of a joke on Red Dwarf: 'Report your friends, family and neighbours... wonderful prizes to be won.
'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020724</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>mikechant</author>
	<datestamp>1265287560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques, deport them </i></p><p>Errm... The majority of them will probably be British born with full non-revokable UK citizenship. Even if you 'revoked' their citizenship in some way (illegal under international law, but that's not a show stopper), they would then be stateless and have no other citizenship. So where do you think they would be deported to? Why do you think that the country you deported them to would accept them or even allow such deportation flights to land at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques , deport them Errm... The majority of them will probably be British born with full non-revokable UK citizenship .
Even if you 'revoked ' their citizenship in some way ( illegal under international law , but that 's not a show stopper ) , they would then be stateless and have no other citizenship .
So where do you think they would be deported to ?
Why do you think that the country you deported them to would accept them or even allow such deportation flights to land at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques, deport them Errm... The majority of them will probably be British born with full non-revokable UK citizenship.
Even if you 'revoked' their citizenship in some way (illegal under international law, but that's not a show stopper), they would then be stateless and have no other citizenship.
So where do you think they would be deported to?
Why do you think that the country you deported them to would accept them or even allow such deportation flights to land at all?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023954</id>
	<title>USAF Air University</title>
	<author>Nuskrad</author>
	<datestamp>1265306940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reported for <a href="http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/terrorism/alqaida\_manual/manualpart1\_1.pdf" title="af.mil">this</a> [af.mil]. People have actually been convicted in the UK for downloading that</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reported for this [ af.mil ] .
People have actually been convicted in the UK for downloading that</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reported for this [af.mil].
People have actually been convicted in the UK for downloading that</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025770</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1265316120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt. The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes  with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily.</i> <br> <br>Or less if more BNP members are like Terence Gavan. Interesting how the media was so quiet about his being jailed over having a collection of bombs and guns. In other words being a <b>terrorist</b>. Indeed the BNP appears to have a fair number of convicted terrorists amongst it's (possibly former) membership. The likes of Robert Cottage, Mark Bulman, Allen Boyce, Joe Owens &amp; Tony Lecomber springing to mind.<br>Yet their website still appears to be up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites ca n't : you ca n't have two nations living inside the same country , especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who wo n't adapt .
The British government has two choices : either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists , or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift , a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily .
Or less if more BNP members are like Terence Gavan .
Interesting how the media was so quiet about his being jailed over having a collection of bombs and guns .
In other words being a terrorist .
Indeed the BNP appears to have a fair number of convicted terrorists amongst it 's ( possibly former ) membership .
The likes of Robert Cottage , Mark Bulman , Allen Boyce , Joe Owens &amp; Tony Lecomber springing to mind.Yet their website still appears to be up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt.
The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes  with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily.
Or less if more BNP members are like Terence Gavan.
Interesting how the media was so quiet about his being jailed over having a collection of bombs and guns.
In other words being a terrorist.
Indeed the BNP appears to have a fair number of convicted terrorists amongst it's (possibly former) membership.
The likes of Robert Cottage, Mark Bulman, Allen Boyce, Joe Owens &amp; Tony Lecomber springing to mind.Yet their website still appears to be up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031460</id>
	<title>Re:Please, for the love of Dog</title>
	<author>seekertom</author>
	<datestamp>1265307780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>get yer head out of the sand! Some one might say your post is 'intended' to educate and enlighten us post-readers, and someone else might say your post 'intended' to incite a riot among us readers. Interpretation rules! Give the govt an open law and I'll bet you anything they will interpret it any way they want, to achieve their ends. Ya just gotta see this, in order for us to even begin thinking about trying to save the planet. thanks fer lis'nin'   seekertom</htmltext>
<tokenext>get yer head out of the sand !
Some one might say your post is 'intended ' to educate and enlighten us post-readers , and someone else might say your post 'intended ' to incite a riot among us readers .
Interpretation rules !
Give the govt an open law and I 'll bet you anything they will interpret it any way they want , to achieve their ends .
Ya just got ta see this , in order for us to even begin thinking about trying to save the planet .
thanks fer lis'nin ' seekertom</tokentext>
<sentencetext>get yer head out of the sand!
Some one might say your post is 'intended' to educate and enlighten us post-readers, and someone else might say your post 'intended' to incite a riot among us readers.
Interpretation rules!
Give the govt an open law and I'll bet you anything they will interpret it any way they want, to achieve their ends.
Ya just gotta see this, in order for us to even begin thinking about trying to save the planet.
thanks fer lis'nin'   seekertom</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</id>
	<title>One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265286120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists, and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

I would hazard to guess based on the media reports that Britain's radical Muslim problem is only topped by the Netherlands (where prominent critics of Islam have been routinely murdered or credibly threatened with murder). There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40\% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia.
<br> <br>
The British government is going to have to start rounding up the radical clerics and deporting them. Hell, banish them from the United Kingdom altogether. The problem is, they know they'll inflame a lot of anti-British sentiment if they do that. Then they'll have to either start cracking skulls left and right or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques, deport them and put a marker on them that permanently marks them as a ne'erdoweller who has no business ever setting foot on British soil again.
<br> <br>
The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt. The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it <strong>sympathizes</strong> with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily.
<br> <br>
The political correctness of the British government is not doing genuine moderate Muslims any good because it's creating an environment where the extremists can thrive under "diversity" and the native population can be slowly radicalized against the entire immigrant population starting from the working class up (IIRC, the British working class were the primary support behind the BNP when it recently won a small, but worrisome amount of the vote for the first time).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists , and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts .
I would hazard to guess based on the media reports that Britain 's radical Muslim problem is only topped by the Netherlands ( where prominent critics of Islam have been routinely murdered or credibly threatened with murder ) .
There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40 \ % of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia .
The British government is going to have to start rounding up the radical clerics and deporting them .
Hell , banish them from the United Kingdom altogether .
The problem is , they know they 'll inflame a lot of anti-British sentiment if they do that .
Then they 'll have to either start cracking skulls left and right or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques , deport them and put a marker on them that permanently marks them as a ne'erdoweller who has no business ever setting foot on British soil again .
The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites ca n't : you ca n't have two nations living inside the same country , especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who wo n't adapt .
The British government has two choices : either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists , or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift , a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily .
The political correctness of the British government is not doing genuine moderate Muslims any good because it 's creating an environment where the extremists can thrive under " diversity " and the native population can be slowly radicalized against the entire immigrant population starting from the working class up ( IIRC , the British working class were the primary support behind the BNP when it recently won a small , but worrisome amount of the vote for the first time ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists, and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts.
I would hazard to guess based on the media reports that Britain's radical Muslim problem is only topped by the Netherlands (where prominent critics of Islam have been routinely murdered or credibly threatened with murder).
There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40\% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia.
The British government is going to have to start rounding up the radical clerics and deporting them.
Hell, banish them from the United Kingdom altogether.
The problem is, they know they'll inflame a lot of anti-British sentiment if they do that.
Then they'll have to either start cracking skulls left and right or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques, deport them and put a marker on them that permanently marks them as a ne'erdoweller who has no business ever setting foot on British soil again.
The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt.
The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily.
The political correctness of the British government is not doing genuine moderate Muslims any good because it's creating an environment where the extremists can thrive under "diversity" and the native population can be slowly radicalized against the entire immigrant population starting from the working class up (IIRC, the British working class were the primary support behind the BNP when it recently won a small, but worrisome amount of the vote for the first time).
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021956</id>
	<title>Re:Perspective</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265297280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh?<p>
<a href="http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG\_184702" title="direct.gov.uk">http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG\_184702</a> [direct.gov.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh ?
http : //www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG \ _184702 [ direct.gov.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh?
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG\_184702 [direct.gov.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020812</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>FourthAge</author>
	<datestamp>1265288580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a very difficult problem, and the response of the three major parties is "Denial". All three say "Immigration and Islamisation are not a problem. We will not even consider them as issues. P.S. You are a racist." I see you have already been called a Nazi for posting this.</p><p>Which is ironic, because your post is a warning about the Nazis in their BNP form. The National Socialists recognise and acknowledge the issues that the main parties do not. They are capitalising on the refusal of the main parties to talk about the issues.</p><p>I think it is obvious now that the multiculturalism policy of the UK government has been a complete disaster. It's created ghettos. Entire cities like Birmingham and Bradford are divided by ethnic groupings. It's encouraged fear and hatred between the groups, fueling terrorism. It's exactly what should never have happened.</p><p>Immigrants should have been welcomed into Britain provided that they were willing to merge into the existing culture and society, as many immigrants are. But instead, they were encouraged to be separate from the existing societies. Ghettos were created, and any concern about the ghettoisation process was dismissed by the UK Establishment as "racism", even though the concerns were well-founded. And it's not just the UK. The same problems exist in France for the same reason.</p><p>It is time to abandon cultural relativism, the idea that each culture - each approach to life - is just as valid as any other. It is simply nonsense. Some cultures are inherently better than others. Absolute comparisons are possible and useful.</p><p>The UK Establishment tells us that such comparisons are "racist" - but why? What is racist about comparing one society and another? Racism is discrimination based on ethnic grouping, not discrimination based on social structure or cultural values.</p><p>It is our duty to discriminate against the values and culture of dark age theocracies. We must not allow the civilisation we have built to be undermined by Sharia and the Middle Eastern dictatorships. The only way to do that is to stick up for what we have, and that means we must all be able to acknowledge that our ways are better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a very difficult problem , and the response of the three major parties is " Denial " .
All three say " Immigration and Islamisation are not a problem .
We will not even consider them as issues .
P.S. You are a racist .
" I see you have already been called a Nazi for posting this.Which is ironic , because your post is a warning about the Nazis in their BNP form .
The National Socialists recognise and acknowledge the issues that the main parties do not .
They are capitalising on the refusal of the main parties to talk about the issues.I think it is obvious now that the multiculturalism policy of the UK government has been a complete disaster .
It 's created ghettos .
Entire cities like Birmingham and Bradford are divided by ethnic groupings .
It 's encouraged fear and hatred between the groups , fueling terrorism .
It 's exactly what should never have happened.Immigrants should have been welcomed into Britain provided that they were willing to merge into the existing culture and society , as many immigrants are .
But instead , they were encouraged to be separate from the existing societies .
Ghettos were created , and any concern about the ghettoisation process was dismissed by the UK Establishment as " racism " , even though the concerns were well-founded .
And it 's not just the UK .
The same problems exist in France for the same reason.It is time to abandon cultural relativism , the idea that each culture - each approach to life - is just as valid as any other .
It is simply nonsense .
Some cultures are inherently better than others .
Absolute comparisons are possible and useful.The UK Establishment tells us that such comparisons are " racist " - but why ?
What is racist about comparing one society and another ?
Racism is discrimination based on ethnic grouping , not discrimination based on social structure or cultural values.It is our duty to discriminate against the values and culture of dark age theocracies .
We must not allow the civilisation we have built to be undermined by Sharia and the Middle Eastern dictatorships .
The only way to do that is to stick up for what we have , and that means we must all be able to acknowledge that our ways are better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a very difficult problem, and the response of the three major parties is "Denial".
All three say "Immigration and Islamisation are not a problem.
We will not even consider them as issues.
P.S. You are a racist.
" I see you have already been called a Nazi for posting this.Which is ironic, because your post is a warning about the Nazis in their BNP form.
The National Socialists recognise and acknowledge the issues that the main parties do not.
They are capitalising on the refusal of the main parties to talk about the issues.I think it is obvious now that the multiculturalism policy of the UK government has been a complete disaster.
It's created ghettos.
Entire cities like Birmingham and Bradford are divided by ethnic groupings.
It's encouraged fear and hatred between the groups, fueling terrorism.
It's exactly what should never have happened.Immigrants should have been welcomed into Britain provided that they were willing to merge into the existing culture and society, as many immigrants are.
But instead, they were encouraged to be separate from the existing societies.
Ghettos were created, and any concern about the ghettoisation process was dismissed by the UK Establishment as "racism", even though the concerns were well-founded.
And it's not just the UK.
The same problems exist in France for the same reason.It is time to abandon cultural relativism, the idea that each culture - each approach to life - is just as valid as any other.
It is simply nonsense.
Some cultures are inherently better than others.
Absolute comparisons are possible and useful.The UK Establishment tells us that such comparisons are "racist" - but why?
What is racist about comparing one society and another?
Racism is discrimination based on ethnic grouping, not discrimination based on social structure or cultural values.It is our duty to discriminate against the values and culture of dark age theocracies.
We must not allow the civilisation we have built to be undermined by Sharia and the Middle Eastern dictatorships.
The only way to do that is to stick up for what we have, and that means we must all be able to acknowledge that our ways are better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021612</id>
	<title>Re:Did you read the footnote?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265295480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In a world where information is criminal, only criminals will have information.</p></div><p>Nonsense. They won't be criminals, they'll be leaders of nations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a world where information is criminal , only criminals will have information.Nonsense .
They wo n't be criminals , they 'll be leaders of nations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a world where information is criminal, only criminals will have information.Nonsense.
They won't be criminals, they'll be leaders of nations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584</id>
	<title>I'd like to report New Labour's web site</title>
	<author>VShael</author>
	<datestamp>1265285520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they scare the sh*t out of me, and I'm pretty sure they're doing it to influence my vote.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they scare the sh * t out of me , and I 'm pretty sure they 're doing it to influence my vote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they scare the sh*t out of me, and I'm pretty sure they're doing it to influence my vote.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023722</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1265305680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks
even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
But once you start deporting/disappearing people just because of their <strong>sympathies</strong> you're really screwed.
<br>
What happens if someone says that they disapprove of the UK/US being in Afghanistan or Iraq?  Does that make them a sympathiser with the Taliban or al-Qaida?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The British government has two choices : either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists But once you start deporting/disappearing people just because of their sympathies you 're really screwed .
What happens if someone says that they disapprove of the UK/US being in Afghanistan or Iraq ?
Does that make them a sympathiser with the Taliban or al-Qaida ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks
even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists

But once you start deporting/disappearing people just because of their sympathies you're really screwed.
What happens if someone says that they disapprove of the UK/US being in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Does that make them a sympathiser with the Taliban or al-Qaida?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31045186</id>
	<title>Re:Me! Me!</title>
	<author>Pilot MoonDog</author>
	<datestamp>1265467800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh it's better than that.

A couple of years ago a friend got me a book for my birthday. It's called SOE Syllabus and outlines the training given to allied agents prior to being dropped behind German lines in occupied Europe.

Most of it is about recognition of various German military or militia organisations. However a good chunk is about setting up an insurgency, That includes ideas about proper cell structure, maintaining communication between cells, spotting and shaking tails, and tactical advice on how to perform various small unit actions. Even given it's age it still has some relevance to the current day.

Who publishes this? The Public Records Office, which is a government body.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh it 's better than that .
A couple of years ago a friend got me a book for my birthday .
It 's called SOE Syllabus and outlines the training given to allied agents prior to being dropped behind German lines in occupied Europe .
Most of it is about recognition of various German military or militia organisations .
However a good chunk is about setting up an insurgency , That includes ideas about proper cell structure , maintaining communication between cells , spotting and shaking tails , and tactical advice on how to perform various small unit actions .
Even given it 's age it still has some relevance to the current day .
Who publishes this ?
The Public Records Office , which is a government body .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh it's better than that.
A couple of years ago a friend got me a book for my birthday.
It's called SOE Syllabus and outlines the training given to allied agents prior to being dropped behind German lines in occupied Europe.
Most of it is about recognition of various German military or militia organisations.
However a good chunk is about setting up an insurgency, That includes ideas about proper cell structure, maintaining communication between cells, spotting and shaking tails, and tactical advice on how to perform various small unit actions.
Even given it's age it still has some relevance to the current day.
Who publishes this?
The Public Records Office, which is a government body.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31030700</id>
	<title>The War on Information</title>
	<author>cavebison</author>
	<datestamp>1265301720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, terrorism-related sites, discussion groups, etc. get taken "off the internet" (I assume they mean filtered from public access in Britain). This basically results in that information being accessible only to government authorities, but not to the public. I assume the authorities still want access to those sites, as they might give clues about planned attacks, etc.</p><p>We've already been drawn into war based on "secret information" which turned out to be false. This seems like just another opportunity for abuse of public trust and stifling public scrutiny of government decision-making.</p><p>I'm not talking about Joe Bloggs needing to know what terrorist and propaganda sites are out there, but certain people do. Journalists, academics, etc. Those important parts of public society that help us keep an eye on those we put in office. The power is ours, not the government's - we pay their salaries, they work for us. Yet they fail us on so many levels, and need to be constantly held to account.</p><p>Who is going to play that role, if the information is not there any more?</p><p>This is only a UK filter, so the sites are still "on the internet", but the principle should be raised.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , terrorism-related sites , discussion groups , etc .
get taken " off the internet " ( I assume they mean filtered from public access in Britain ) .
This basically results in that information being accessible only to government authorities , but not to the public .
I assume the authorities still want access to those sites , as they might give clues about planned attacks , etc.We 've already been drawn into war based on " secret information " which turned out to be false .
This seems like just another opportunity for abuse of public trust and stifling public scrutiny of government decision-making.I 'm not talking about Joe Bloggs needing to know what terrorist and propaganda sites are out there , but certain people do .
Journalists , academics , etc .
Those important parts of public society that help us keep an eye on those we put in office .
The power is ours , not the government 's - we pay their salaries , they work for us .
Yet they fail us on so many levels , and need to be constantly held to account.Who is going to play that role , if the information is not there any more ? This is only a UK filter , so the sites are still " on the internet " , but the principle should be raised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, terrorism-related sites, discussion groups, etc.
get taken "off the internet" (I assume they mean filtered from public access in Britain).
This basically results in that information being accessible only to government authorities, but not to the public.
I assume the authorities still want access to those sites, as they might give clues about planned attacks, etc.We've already been drawn into war based on "secret information" which turned out to be false.
This seems like just another opportunity for abuse of public trust and stifling public scrutiny of government decision-making.I'm not talking about Joe Bloggs needing to know what terrorist and propaganda sites are out there, but certain people do.
Journalists, academics, etc.
Those important parts of public society that help us keep an eye on those we put in office.
The power is ours, not the government's - we pay their salaries, they work for us.
Yet they fail us on so many levels, and need to be constantly held to account.Who is going to play that role, if the information is not there any more?This is only a UK filter, so the sites are still "on the internet", but the principle should be raised.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020738</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>mayhem79</author>
	<datestamp>1265287680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, instead of taking down sites (espcially ones outsaide the UK), I think it might be easier for the government to produce a black-list and form UK ISP to enforce it using laws and policy.</p><p>Now theres a worrying thought, does anyone happen to know if theres such a thing in place in the UK currently?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , instead of taking down sites ( espcially ones outsaide the UK ) , I think it might be easier for the government to produce a black-list and form UK ISP to enforce it using laws and policy.Now theres a worrying thought , does anyone happen to know if theres such a thing in place in the UK currently ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, instead of taking down sites (espcially ones outsaide the UK), I think it might be easier for the government to produce a black-list and form UK ISP to enforce it using laws and policy.Now theres a worrying thought, does anyone happen to know if theres such a thing in place in the UK currently?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022756</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265301180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your post was going fine right up until this point<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p><p><div class="quote"><p><b>I would hazard to guess based on the media reports</b> that Britain's radical Muslim problem is only topped by the Netherlands... </p></div><p>Sure if you use the Daily Mail or other even less reputable sources then you might wind up believing the FUD spouted by the BNP. I hate to Godwin myself so early on, but I do hope you realise that blatant propaganda against unpopular minorities is how the BNP's historical heroes got themselves into a position of power as well.</p><p>If you're on the ground and speaking to actual member of the Muslim community (our local mosque does a great curry kitchen before services that anyone can attend) you find an extremely different story - although I do believe the examples of extremism from both Muslims and Nationalist Scum are less frequent in Scotland than they are in say Birmingham.</p><p>You don't seem to understand that the British Government is extremely far away from political correctness, and the only reason it keeps coming up as a news story is that they are desperately trying to find ways carry out blatantly prejudice policies without coming across as a bunch of prejudiced cowards, all the while dealing with the vocal minority of right-wing media groups that think everything up to and including equal rights for anyone that isn't a white protestant is political correctness.</p><p>We're constantly deporting extremist clerics whenever we can get enough evidence - evidence that they have 'said' bad things about us, evidence of their thought-crimes basically - and occasionally we apply the law in a fair manner and exclude extremists of other nationalities as long as they appear nutty enough (racists Danish MP's spring to mind). however we haven't quite figured out what to do when British Nationals (as in citizen not party member) start spouting hate-filled generalisations and rhetoric - other than to give them air-time on Question Time Live.</p><p>There is only one way forward for the Government is this country - to enshrine the basic humans rights (speech, movement, belief etc. - the same ones the US enshrined effectively) in some form of binding document, in the process of ditching the bloated EU version - and to properly and fully* separate church and state (*unlike the US in this case where you said you would but seem to have done in name only and forgotten to actually enforce it). At this point the British public can be informed that no amount of Democratic process will allow them to bully or victimise any group of people based on nationality, race, religion or sex, no matter how many of them apparently believe that being British gives them the right to do this.</p><p>As a member of Great Britain I am truly sick of being told that I'm either capitalist pig or socialist devil; at being told that I'm not British unless I carry Union Jack, shave my head and kick in any brown-skins I see on the weekends and evenings; utterly disgusted at being told that I am sympathising with extremist sexist clerics just because I don't want to see my law-abiding, friendly as could be, neighbours evicted and deported just because part of their religion involves wearing some funny clothes; But most of all I am sick of being told what to think, what to wear, who to be friends with, which nutty imaginary friend is ok to believe in by the citizens of this and other countries no less - I'm not even talking about my Government who I have come to expect this shite from - No, I'm talking about arseholes like you! The idiots who will no doubt go their graves honestly beleiving they are better than the dickless suicide bombers and hate-filled clerics because they work in the name of a white God, or even worse so-called Democracy. Hate begets Hate, and your hatred of them is just as sick and evil as the minority-extremists hate for us.</p><p>Find some other country to do this with - all you go to one piece of rock in the sea, and all your enemies can to a piece of rock about 2 miles away from it and you can blow the ever-living tar out of each other all you fucking like. The rest of us want to get on with our lives and would like to be able to do it as we please, with who we please.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your post was going fine right up until this point : PI would hazard to guess based on the media reports that Britain 's radical Muslim problem is only topped by the Netherlands... Sure if you use the Daily Mail or other even less reputable sources then you might wind up believing the FUD spouted by the BNP .
I hate to Godwin myself so early on , but I do hope you realise that blatant propaganda against unpopular minorities is how the BNP 's historical heroes got themselves into a position of power as well.If you 're on the ground and speaking to actual member of the Muslim community ( our local mosque does a great curry kitchen before services that anyone can attend ) you find an extremely different story - although I do believe the examples of extremism from both Muslims and Nationalist Scum are less frequent in Scotland than they are in say Birmingham.You do n't seem to understand that the British Government is extremely far away from political correctness , and the only reason it keeps coming up as a news story is that they are desperately trying to find ways carry out blatantly prejudice policies without coming across as a bunch of prejudiced cowards , all the while dealing with the vocal minority of right-wing media groups that think everything up to and including equal rights for anyone that is n't a white protestant is political correctness.We 're constantly deporting extremist clerics whenever we can get enough evidence - evidence that they have 'said ' bad things about us , evidence of their thought-crimes basically - and occasionally we apply the law in a fair manner and exclude extremists of other nationalities as long as they appear nutty enough ( racists Danish MP 's spring to mind ) .
however we have n't quite figured out what to do when British Nationals ( as in citizen not party member ) start spouting hate-filled generalisations and rhetoric - other than to give them air-time on Question Time Live.There is only one way forward for the Government is this country - to enshrine the basic humans rights ( speech , movement , belief etc .
- the same ones the US enshrined effectively ) in some form of binding document , in the process of ditching the bloated EU version - and to properly and fully * separate church and state ( * unlike the US in this case where you said you would but seem to have done in name only and forgotten to actually enforce it ) .
At this point the British public can be informed that no amount of Democratic process will allow them to bully or victimise any group of people based on nationality , race , religion or sex , no matter how many of them apparently believe that being British gives them the right to do this.As a member of Great Britain I am truly sick of being told that I 'm either capitalist pig or socialist devil ; at being told that I 'm not British unless I carry Union Jack , shave my head and kick in any brown-skins I see on the weekends and evenings ; utterly disgusted at being told that I am sympathising with extremist sexist clerics just because I do n't want to see my law-abiding , friendly as could be , neighbours evicted and deported just because part of their religion involves wearing some funny clothes ; But most of all I am sick of being told what to think , what to wear , who to be friends with , which nutty imaginary friend is ok to believe in by the citizens of this and other countries no less - I 'm not even talking about my Government who I have come to expect this shite from - No , I 'm talking about arseholes like you !
The idiots who will no doubt go their graves honestly beleiving they are better than the dickless suicide bombers and hate-filled clerics because they work in the name of a white God , or even worse so-called Democracy .
Hate begets Hate , and your hatred of them is just as sick and evil as the minority-extremists hate for us.Find some other country to do this with - all you go to one piece of rock in the sea , and all your enemies can to a piece of rock about 2 miles away from it and you can blow the ever-living tar out of each other all you fucking like .
The rest of us want to get on with our lives and would like to be able to do it as we please , with who we please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your post was going fine right up until this point :PI would hazard to guess based on the media reports that Britain's radical Muslim problem is only topped by the Netherlands... Sure if you use the Daily Mail or other even less reputable sources then you might wind up believing the FUD spouted by the BNP.
I hate to Godwin myself so early on, but I do hope you realise that blatant propaganda against unpopular minorities is how the BNP's historical heroes got themselves into a position of power as well.If you're on the ground and speaking to actual member of the Muslim community (our local mosque does a great curry kitchen before services that anyone can attend) you find an extremely different story - although I do believe the examples of extremism from both Muslims and Nationalist Scum are less frequent in Scotland than they are in say Birmingham.You don't seem to understand that the British Government is extremely far away from political correctness, and the only reason it keeps coming up as a news story is that they are desperately trying to find ways carry out blatantly prejudice policies without coming across as a bunch of prejudiced cowards, all the while dealing with the vocal minority of right-wing media groups that think everything up to and including equal rights for anyone that isn't a white protestant is political correctness.We're constantly deporting extremist clerics whenever we can get enough evidence - evidence that they have 'said' bad things about us, evidence of their thought-crimes basically - and occasionally we apply the law in a fair manner and exclude extremists of other nationalities as long as they appear nutty enough (racists Danish MP's spring to mind).
however we haven't quite figured out what to do when British Nationals (as in citizen not party member) start spouting hate-filled generalisations and rhetoric - other than to give them air-time on Question Time Live.There is only one way forward for the Government is this country - to enshrine the basic humans rights (speech, movement, belief etc.
- the same ones the US enshrined effectively) in some form of binding document, in the process of ditching the bloated EU version - and to properly and fully* separate church and state (*unlike the US in this case where you said you would but seem to have done in name only and forgotten to actually enforce it).
At this point the British public can be informed that no amount of Democratic process will allow them to bully or victimise any group of people based on nationality, race, religion or sex, no matter how many of them apparently believe that being British gives them the right to do this.As a member of Great Britain I am truly sick of being told that I'm either capitalist pig or socialist devil; at being told that I'm not British unless I carry Union Jack, shave my head and kick in any brown-skins I see on the weekends and evenings; utterly disgusted at being told that I am sympathising with extremist sexist clerics just because I don't want to see my law-abiding, friendly as could be, neighbours evicted and deported just because part of their religion involves wearing some funny clothes; But most of all I am sick of being told what to think, what to wear, who to be friends with, which nutty imaginary friend is ok to believe in by the citizens of this and other countries no less - I'm not even talking about my Government who I have come to expect this shite from - No, I'm talking about arseholes like you!
The idiots who will no doubt go their graves honestly beleiving they are better than the dickless suicide bombers and hate-filled clerics because they work in the name of a white God, or even worse so-called Democracy.
Hate begets Hate, and your hatred of them is just as sick and evil as the minority-extremists hate for us.Find some other country to do this with - all you go to one piece of rock in the sea, and all your enemies can to a piece of rock about 2 miles away from it and you can blow the ever-living tar out of each other all you fucking like.
The rest of us want to get on with our lives and would like to be able to do it as we please, with who we please.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020560</id>
	<title>Unclear summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, if a terrorist does a Google search for info about weapons, will Google be censored?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , if a terrorist does a Google search for info about weapons , will Google be censored ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, if a terrorist does a Google search for info about weapons, will Google be censored?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020884</id>
	<title>Re:A fine sentiment!</title>
	<author>LordLucless</author>
	<datestamp>1265289540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world. Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.</p></div><p>In other words, the ends justifies the means. Who cares if you trample on the occasional freedom or two, if it means you can look like you're trying to catch the boogaboo-of-the-month (terrorist, pedophile, communist). Because, you know, getting people to dob in websites is going to really put a dent in terrorist activities. All those terrorist organisations with military training camps in the Middle East won't have a clue what to do if we take down all the websites about how to make Molotov cocktails.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road , idealism does n't get you very far in the real world .
Truth be told , the UK has a large problem with radical , violent , political Islam , and merely pussyfooting around , striving not to offend , and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of " rights " and " freedoms " -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.In other words , the ends justifies the means .
Who cares if you trample on the occasional freedom or two , if it means you can look like you 're trying to catch the boogaboo-of-the-month ( terrorist , pedophile , communist ) .
Because , you know , getting people to dob in websites is going to really put a dent in terrorist activities .
All those terrorist organisations with military training camps in the Middle East wo n't have a clue what to do if we take down all the websites about how to make Molotov cocktails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world.
Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.In other words, the ends justifies the means.
Who cares if you trample on the occasional freedom or two, if it means you can look like you're trying to catch the boogaboo-of-the-month (terrorist, pedophile, communist).
Because, you know, getting people to dob in websites is going to really put a dent in terrorist activities.
All those terrorist organisations with military training camps in the Middle East won't have a clue what to do if we take down all the websites about how to make Molotov cocktails.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020714</id>
	<title>Re:Me! Me!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265287380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google maps! And any other Google service, and Live, and wikipedia, and...
I'd like to give to the UK Home Office a full list of sites to block but unfortunately its reporting site is too small to contain it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google maps !
And any other Google service , and Live , and wikipedia , and.. . I 'd like to give to the UK Home Office a full list of sites to block but unfortunately its reporting site is too small to contain it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google maps!
And any other Google service, and Live, and wikipedia, and...
I'd like to give to the UK Home Office a full list of sites to block but unfortunately its reporting site is too small to contain it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020574</id>
	<title>Catch 22</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Citizen: "Ossifer, I've looked at this website and it is terism"<br>Plod: "So you admit to looking at terism? Go directly to Belmarsh. Do not pass go"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Citizen : " Ossifer , I 've looked at this website and it is terism " Plod : " So you admit to looking at terism ?
Go directly to Belmarsh .
Do not pass go "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Citizen: "Ossifer, I've looked at this website and it is terism"Plod: "So you admit to looking at terism?
Go directly to Belmarsh.
Do not pass go"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025342</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265313420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. I've been wondering why I can't access www.nuclearbombsforbeginners.org. It makes sense now.</p><p>Oh hang on, there's somebody banging on the door downst...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
I 've been wondering why I ca n't access www.nuclearbombsforbeginners.org .
It makes sense now.Oh hang on , there 's somebody banging on the door downst.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
I've been wondering why I can't access www.nuclearbombsforbeginners.org.
It makes sense now.Oh hang on, there's somebody banging on the door downst...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020672</id>
	<title>tube</title>
	<author>muckracer</author>
	<datestamp>1265286720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I reported the Subway (The Tube in the UK) schedules as being dramatically helpful to terrorists. Not only to target the subway itself but they might use it to get to their unrelated targets. Coming to think of it, let's shut down all Internet access cuz who knows what them terrorists will use it for...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I reported the Subway ( The Tube in the UK ) schedules as being dramatically helpful to terrorists .
Not only to target the subway itself but they might use it to get to their unrelated targets .
Coming to think of it , let 's shut down all Internet access cuz who knows what them terrorists will use it for.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I reported the Subway (The Tube in the UK) schedules as being dramatically helpful to terrorists.
Not only to target the subway itself but they might use it to get to their unrelated targets.
Coming to think of it, let's shut down all Internet access cuz who knows what them terrorists will use it for...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021108</id>
	<title>can't do blanket submissions</title>
	<author>andyjb</author>
	<datestamp>1265291880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tried <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/*" title="dailymail.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/*</a> [dailymail.co.uk] but it didn't work.

seriously though - this seems open to abuse.

Presumably they have to get a threshold number of complaints before they will look at something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried http : //www.dailymail.co.uk/ * [ dailymail.co.uk ] but it did n't work .
seriously though - this seems open to abuse .
Presumably they have to get a threshold number of complaints before they will look at something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried http://www.dailymail.co.uk/* [dailymail.co.uk] but it didn't work.
seriously though - this seems open to abuse.
Presumably they have to get a threshold number of complaints before they will look at something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021468</id>
	<title>Godwin Time</title>
	<author>clickety6</author>
	<datestamp>1265294700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was a time when reporting your fellow citizens wasn't referred to as "crowd sourcing censorship".</p><p>Hmm... when were the government advocating  "denunciations" in Germany?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was a time when reporting your fellow citizens was n't referred to as " crowd sourcing censorship " .Hmm... when were the government advocating " denunciations " in Germany ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was a time when reporting your fellow citizens wasn't referred to as "crowd sourcing censorship".Hmm... when were the government advocating  "denunciations" in Germany?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022962</id>
	<title>Fun!</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1265302200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm totally submitting teh Google.</p><p>Hey, the terrorists could use it to search for GOD KNOWS WHAT!!1!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm totally submitting teh Google.Hey , the terrorists could use it to search for GOD KNOWS WHAT !
! 1 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm totally submitting teh Google.Hey, the terrorists could use it to search for GOD KNOWS WHAT!
!1!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023808</id>
	<title>Why such love for the old DDR...</title>
	<author>Hasai</author>
	<datestamp>1265306220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...that Brits feel this overwhelming need to resurrect it?</p><p>Every citizen a government informer: The old Stasi crew must be laughing their arses off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...that Brits feel this overwhelming need to resurrect it ? Every citizen a government informer : The old Stasi crew must be laughing their arses off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that Brits feel this overwhelming need to resurrect it?Every citizen a government informer: The old Stasi crew must be laughing their arses off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025384</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265313600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are absolutely correct, deportation would not work.<br>The only alternative is the ovens...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are absolutely correct , deportation would not work.The only alternative is the ovens.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are absolutely correct, deportation would not work.The only alternative is the ovens...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020600</id>
	<title>Knee jerk gov response</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is so annoying in two main ways.  One, the banned site can be up again in minutes (under a new web name), so that does not help and two, the wording of the ban covers such a wide range of meaning as to make it a blank order to close any site in the world, after all even the bbc site covers news about terror so it that no illegal?</p><p>Tackle the terrorist ideas at their roots, a light in the darkness, so to speak.  That will be more effective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is so annoying in two main ways .
One , the banned site can be up again in minutes ( under a new web name ) , so that does not help and two , the wording of the ban covers such a wide range of meaning as to make it a blank order to close any site in the world , after all even the bbc site covers news about terror so it that no illegal ? Tackle the terrorist ideas at their roots , a light in the darkness , so to speak .
That will be more effective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is so annoying in two main ways.
One, the banned site can be up again in minutes (under a new web name), so that does not help and two, the wording of the ban covers such a wide range of meaning as to make it a blank order to close any site in the world, after all even the bbc site covers news about terror so it that no illegal?Tackle the terrorist ideas at their roots, a light in the darkness, so to speak.
That will be more effective.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023316</id>
	<title>The Real Terrorists</title>
	<author>HooliganIntellectual</author>
	<datestamp>1265303760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow! They are going to have to ban most of the British government's own websites, as they are part of an international terrorist network.

Good luck with that!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow !
They are going to have to ban most of the British government 's own websites , as they are part of an international terrorist network .
Good luck with that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow!
They are going to have to ban most of the British government's own websites, as they are part of an international terrorist network.
Good luck with that!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021422</id>
	<title>One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter</title>
	<author>gnarlin</author>
	<datestamp>1265294400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023932</id>
	<title>Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265306880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Correct me if wrong. Isn't this exactly what Hitler tried ? Isn't this 'making sure there is no plurality of culture exists' and 'establishing superiority of our culture' is what led to Hilter's rampage ?  Isn't this also basis for communism in Russia ? Religion and Culture are tied.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if wrong .
Is n't this exactly what Hitler tried ?
Is n't this 'making sure there is no plurality of culture exists ' and 'establishing superiority of our culture ' is what led to Hilter 's rampage ?
Is n't this also basis for communism in Russia ?
Religion and Culture are tied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if wrong.
Isn't this exactly what Hitler tried ?
Isn't this 'making sure there is no plurality of culture exists' and 'establishing superiority of our culture' is what led to Hilter's rampage ?
Isn't this also basis for communism in Russia ?
Religion and Culture are tied.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021294</id>
	<title>Backfire</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1265293380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts."</p><p>Then since the material at <a href="http://www.2020tech.com/thanks/temp.html" title="2020tech.com">http://www.2020tech.com/thanks/temp.html</a> [2020tech.com] describes a group of people who committed multiple acts of terrorism, it would have to go, along with any of the more sanitized versions such as are presented as childrens' plays all over the US yearly, since these romanticized versions 'glorify' their actions. How ironic that the descendants of these terrorists would pass a law banning their ancestors' story.</p><p>=== snippedy snip ===</p><p>1. The Puritans were not just simple religious<br>conservatives persecuted by the King and the Church of<br>England for their unorthodox beliefs. They were<br>political revolutionaries who not only intended to<br>overthrow the government of England, but who actually<br>did so in 1649.</p><p>2. The Puritan "Pilgrims" who came to New England were not<br>simply refugees who decided to "put their fate in God's<br>hands" in the "empty wilderness" of North America, as a<br>generation of Hollywood movies taught us. In any culture<br>at any time, settlers on a frontier are most often<br>outcasts and fugitives who, in some way or other, do not<br>fit into the mainstream of their society. This is not to<br>imply that people who settle on frontiers have no<br>redeeming qualities such as bravery, etc., but that the<br>images of nobility that we associate with the Puritans<br>are at least in part the good "P.R." efforts of later<br>writers who have romanticized them.(1) It is also very<br>plausible that this unnaturally noble image of the<br>Puritans is all wrapped up with the mythology of "Noble<br>Civilization" vs. "Savagery."(2) At any rate, mainstream<br>Englishmen considered the Pilgrims to be deliberate<br>religious dropouts who intended to found a new nation<br>completely independent from non-Puritan England. In 1643<br>the Puritan/Pilgrims declared themselves an independent<br>confederacy, one hundred and forty-three years before<br>the American Revolution. They believed in the imminent<br>occurrence of Armegeddon in Europe and hoped to<br>establish here in the new world the "Kingdom of God"<br>foretold in the book of Revelation. They diverged from<br>their Puritan brethren who remained in England only in<br>that they held little real hope of ever being able to<br>successfully overthrow the King and Parliament and,<br>thereby, impose their "Rule of Saints" (yestrict Puritan<br>orthodoxy) on the rest of the British people. So they<br>came to America not just in one ship (the Mayflower) but<br>in a hundred others as well, with every intention of<br>taking the land away from its native people to build<br>their prophesied "Holy Kingdom."(3)</p><p>3. The Pilgrims were not just innocent refugees from<br>religious persecution. They were victims of bigotry in<br>England, but some of them were themselves religious<br>bigots by our modern standards. The Puritans and the<br>Pilgrims saw themselves as the "Chosen Elect" mentioned<br>in the book of Revelation. They strove to "purify" first<br>themselves and then everyone else of everything they did<br>not accept in their own interpretation of scripture.<br>Later New England Puritans used any means, including<br>deceptions, treachery, torture, war, and genocide to<br>achieve that end.(4) They saw themselves as fighting a<br>holy war against Satan, and everyone who disagreed with<br>them was the enemy. This rigid fundamentalism was<br>transmitted to America by the Plymouth colonists, and it<br>sheds a very different light on the "Pilgrim" image we<br>have of them. This is best illustrated in the written<br>text of the Thanksgiving sermon delivered at Plymouth in<br>1623 by "Mather the Elder." In it, Mather the Elder gave<br>special thanks to God for the devastating plague of<br>smallpox which wiped out the majority of the Wampanoag<br>Indians who had been their benefactors. He praised God<br>for destroying "chiefly young men and children, the very<br>seeds of increase, thus clearing the forests to ma</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts .
" Then since the material at http : //www.2020tech.com/thanks/temp.html [ 2020tech.com ] describes a group of people who committed multiple acts of terrorism , it would have to go , along with any of the more sanitized versions such as are presented as childrens ' plays all over the US yearly , since these romanticized versions 'glorify ' their actions .
How ironic that the descendants of these terrorists would pass a law banning their ancestors ' story. = = = snippedy snip = = = 1 .
The Puritans were not just simple religiousconservatives persecuted by the King and the Church ofEngland for their unorthodox beliefs .
They werepolitical revolutionaries who not only intended tooverthrow the government of England , but who actuallydid so in 1649.2 .
The Puritan " Pilgrims " who came to New England were notsimply refugees who decided to " put their fate in God'shands " in the " empty wilderness " of North America , as ageneration of Hollywood movies taught us .
In any cultureat any time , settlers on a frontier are most oftenoutcasts and fugitives who , in some way or other , do notfit into the mainstream of their society .
This is not toimply that people who settle on frontiers have noredeeming qualities such as bravery , etc. , but that theimages of nobility that we associate with the Puritansare at least in part the good " P.R .
" efforts of laterwriters who have romanticized them .
( 1 ) It is also veryplausible that this unnaturally noble image of thePuritans is all wrapped up with the mythology of " NobleCivilization " vs .
" Savagery. " ( 2 ) At any rate , mainstreamEnglishmen considered the Pilgrims to be deliberatereligious dropouts who intended to found a new nationcompletely independent from non-Puritan England .
In 1643the Puritan/Pilgrims declared themselves an independentconfederacy , one hundred and forty-three years beforethe American Revolution .
They believed in the imminentoccurrence of Armegeddon in Europe and hoped toestablish here in the new world the " Kingdom of God " foretold in the book of Revelation .
They diverged fromtheir Puritan brethren who remained in England only inthat they held little real hope of ever being able tosuccessfully overthrow the King and Parliament and,thereby , impose their " Rule of Saints " ( yestrict Puritanorthodoxy ) on the rest of the British people .
So theycame to America not just in one ship ( the Mayflower ) butin a hundred others as well , with every intention oftaking the land away from its native people to buildtheir prophesied " Holy Kingdom. " ( 3 ) 3 .
The Pilgrims were not just innocent refugees fromreligious persecution .
They were victims of bigotry inEngland , but some of them were themselves religiousbigots by our modern standards .
The Puritans and thePilgrims saw themselves as the " Chosen Elect " mentionedin the book of Revelation .
They strove to " purify " firstthemselves and then everyone else of everything they didnot accept in their own interpretation of scripture.Later New England Puritans used any means , includingdeceptions , treachery , torture , war , and genocide toachieve that end .
( 4 ) They saw themselves as fighting aholy war against Satan , and everyone who disagreed withthem was the enemy .
This rigid fundamentalism wastransmitted to America by the Plymouth colonists , and itsheds a very different light on the " Pilgrim " image wehave of them .
This is best illustrated in the writtentext of the Thanksgiving sermon delivered at Plymouth in1623 by " Mather the Elder .
" In it , Mather the Elder gavespecial thanks to God for the devastating plague ofsmallpox which wiped out the majority of the WampanoagIndians who had been their benefactors .
He praised Godfor destroying " chiefly young men and children , the veryseeds of increase , thus clearing the forests to ma</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts.
"Then since the material at http://www.2020tech.com/thanks/temp.html [2020tech.com] describes a group of people who committed multiple acts of terrorism, it would have to go, along with any of the more sanitized versions such as are presented as childrens' plays all over the US yearly, since these romanticized versions 'glorify' their actions.
How ironic that the descendants of these terrorists would pass a law banning their ancestors' story.=== snippedy snip ===1.
The Puritans were not just simple religiousconservatives persecuted by the King and the Church ofEngland for their unorthodox beliefs.
They werepolitical revolutionaries who not only intended tooverthrow the government of England, but who actuallydid so in 1649.2.
The Puritan "Pilgrims" who came to New England were notsimply refugees who decided to "put their fate in God'shands" in the "empty wilderness" of North America, as ageneration of Hollywood movies taught us.
In any cultureat any time, settlers on a frontier are most oftenoutcasts and fugitives who, in some way or other, do notfit into the mainstream of their society.
This is not toimply that people who settle on frontiers have noredeeming qualities such as bravery, etc., but that theimages of nobility that we associate with the Puritansare at least in part the good "P.R.
" efforts of laterwriters who have romanticized them.
(1) It is also veryplausible that this unnaturally noble image of thePuritans is all wrapped up with the mythology of "NobleCivilization" vs.
"Savagery."(2) At any rate, mainstreamEnglishmen considered the Pilgrims to be deliberatereligious dropouts who intended to found a new nationcompletely independent from non-Puritan England.
In 1643the Puritan/Pilgrims declared themselves an independentconfederacy, one hundred and forty-three years beforethe American Revolution.
They believed in the imminentoccurrence of Armegeddon in Europe and hoped toestablish here in the new world the "Kingdom of God"foretold in the book of Revelation.
They diverged fromtheir Puritan brethren who remained in England only inthat they held little real hope of ever being able tosuccessfully overthrow the King and Parliament and,thereby, impose their "Rule of Saints" (yestrict Puritanorthodoxy) on the rest of the British people.
So theycame to America not just in one ship (the Mayflower) butin a hundred others as well, with every intention oftaking the land away from its native people to buildtheir prophesied "Holy Kingdom."(3)3.
The Pilgrims were not just innocent refugees fromreligious persecution.
They were victims of bigotry inEngland, but some of them were themselves religiousbigots by our modern standards.
The Puritans and thePilgrims saw themselves as the "Chosen Elect" mentionedin the book of Revelation.
They strove to "purify" firstthemselves and then everyone else of everything they didnot accept in their own interpretation of scripture.Later New England Puritans used any means, includingdeceptions, treachery, torture, war, and genocide toachieve that end.
(4) They saw themselves as fighting aholy war against Satan, and everyone who disagreed withthem was the enemy.
This rigid fundamentalism wastransmitted to America by the Plymouth colonists, and itsheds a very different light on the "Pilgrim" image wehave of them.
This is best illustrated in the writtentext of the Thanksgiving sermon delivered at Plymouth in1623 by "Mather the Elder.
" In it, Mather the Elder gavespecial thanks to God for the devastating plague ofsmallpox which wiped out the majority of the WampanoagIndians who had been their benefactors.
He praised Godfor destroying "chiefly young men and children, the veryseeds of increase, thus clearing the forests to ma</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020694</id>
	<title>Website Captcha Fail</title>
	<author>LingNoi</author>
	<datestamp>1265287080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The worse part about this site is that they have recaptcha on it but verify the request in javascript.</p><p>Hence you can stick this request on your spam bot...</p><p><a href="https://reporting.direct.gov.uk/bin/submitter.php?report\_type=1&amp;report\_url=reporting.direct.gov.uk&amp;report\_desc=GeorgeOrwellWasRight" title="direct.gov.uk" rel="nofollow">https://reporting.direct.gov.uk/bin/submitter.php?report\_type=1&amp;report\_url=reporting.direct.gov.uk&amp;report\_desc=GeorgeOrwellWasRight</a> [direct.gov.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The worse part about this site is that they have recaptcha on it but verify the request in javascript.Hence you can stick this request on your spam bot...https : //reporting.direct.gov.uk/bin/submitter.php ? report \ _type = 1&amp;report \ _url = reporting.direct.gov.uk&amp;report \ _desc = GeorgeOrwellWasRight [ direct.gov.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The worse part about this site is that they have recaptcha on it but verify the request in javascript.Hence you can stick this request on your spam bot...https://reporting.direct.gov.uk/bin/submitter.php?report\_type=1&amp;report\_url=reporting.direct.gov.uk&amp;report\_desc=GeorgeOrwellWasRight [direct.gov.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022610</id>
	<title>Re:Unclear summary</title>
	<author>JasterBobaMereel</author>
	<datestamp>1265300460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple answer - no</p><p>Google is not based in the UK so they cannot be censored by the UK government, and given their current attitude re China are unlikely to be helpful<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>They could theoretically ask the ISP's voluntary censor (Internet Watch Foundation) to add Google to their censor list<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... but again this would be an unpopular move and would not block it for many people<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple answer - noGoogle is not based in the UK so they can not be censored by the UK government , and given their current attitude re China are unlikely to be helpful ...They could theoretically ask the ISP 's voluntary censor ( Internet Watch Foundation ) to add Google to their censor list .... but again this would be an unpopular move and would not block it for many people ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple answer - noGoogle is not based in the UK so they cannot be censored by the UK government, and given their current attitude re China are unlikely to be helpful ...They could theoretically ask the ISP's voluntary censor (Internet Watch Foundation) to add Google to their censor list .... but again this would be an unpopular move and would not block it for many people ....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022560</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265300280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder when shows like Brainiac and Mythbusters are going to be banned? When will you require police(state) clearance to learn chemistry at school? or even ban chemistry from school?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder when shows like Brainiac and Mythbusters are going to be banned ?
When will you require police ( state ) clearance to learn chemistry at school ?
or even ban chemistry from school ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder when shows like Brainiac and Mythbusters are going to be banned?
When will you require police(state) clearance to learn chemistry at school?
or even ban chemistry from school?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024458</id>
	<title>hmm</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1265309040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In a world where information is criminal, only criminals will have information.</p></div><p>Information doesn't kill people.  Informed people kill people!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a world where information is criminal , only criminals will have information.Information does n't kill people .
Informed people kill people !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a world where information is criminal, only criminals will have information.Information doesn't kill people.
Informed people kill people!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021566</id>
	<title>Re:US and UK government are melding</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265295180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but what was the whitehouse doing there? were they censoring people or just wanted to know what disinformation was being spread around so they could rebut? I never heard anything more about that other than weird conspiracy theories.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but what was the whitehouse doing there ?
were they censoring people or just wanted to know what disinformation was being spread around so they could rebut ?
I never heard anything more about that other than weird conspiracy theories .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but what was the whitehouse doing there?
were they censoring people or just wanted to know what disinformation was being spread around so they could rebut?
I never heard anything more about that other than weird conspiracy theories.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678</id>
	<title>A fine sentiment!</title>
	<author>benjfowler</author>
	<datestamp>1265286780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know there's a lot of very idealistic and naive libertarians on Slashdot who chafe against anything that would even hint suppressing free flow of information, no matter how objectionable or subversive.</p><p>But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world.  Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.</p><p>I heartily endorse any action taken to crack Islamist heads in the UK.  Sometimes, tough choices have to be made, and idealism dispensed with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know there 's a lot of very idealistic and naive libertarians on Slashdot who chafe against anything that would even hint suppressing free flow of information , no matter how objectionable or subversive.But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road , idealism does n't get you very far in the real world .
Truth be told , the UK has a large problem with radical , violent , political Islam , and merely pussyfooting around , striving not to offend , and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of " rights " and " freedoms " -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.I heartily endorse any action taken to crack Islamist heads in the UK .
Sometimes , tough choices have to be made , and idealism dispensed with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know there's a lot of very idealistic and naive libertarians on Slashdot who chafe against anything that would even hint suppressing free flow of information, no matter how objectionable or subversive.But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world.
Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.I heartily endorse any action taken to crack Islamist heads in the UK.
Sometimes, tough choices have to be made, and idealism dispensed with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31032456</id>
	<title>Re:I'd like to report New Labour's web site</title>
	<author>bythescruff</author>
	<datestamp>1265363460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have a look at the Liberal Democrats' site - it's a little reassuring.  Then, please, get off your arse and get involved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have a look at the Liberal Democrats ' site - it 's a little reassuring .
Then , please , get off your arse and get involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have a look at the Liberal Democrats' site - it's a little reassuring.
Then, please, get off your arse and get involved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021886</id>
	<title>Re:US and UK government are melding</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1265296920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Very true. From the perspective of a German, this is worryingly similar to the Stasi. Let's hope that we can keep our local censorship jockeys in check; I'd hate to see history repeat itself like that.<br>
<br>
Even from the perspective of the state there's a problem with this: If you grow too distrustful of your citizens, they will lose their trust in you. It's very hard to run a country when your own citizens see working against you as noble, especially if you're a control freak.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Very true .
From the perspective of a German , this is worryingly similar to the Stasi .
Let 's hope that we can keep our local censorship jockeys in check ; I 'd hate to see history repeat itself like that .
Even from the perspective of the state there 's a problem with this : If you grow too distrustful of your citizens , they will lose their trust in you .
It 's very hard to run a country when your own citizens see working against you as noble , especially if you 're a control freak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very true.
From the perspective of a German, this is worryingly similar to the Stasi.
Let's hope that we can keep our local censorship jockeys in check; I'd hate to see history repeat itself like that.
Even from the perspective of the state there's a problem with this: If you grow too distrustful of your citizens, they will lose their trust in you.
It's very hard to run a country when your own citizens see working against you as noble, especially if you're a control freak.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021332</id>
	<title>So, how long do you think it will take?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265293680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How long before this will be brought down due to false reportings?</p><p>I'm placing my bets on whenever 4chan gets a hold of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long before this will be brought down due to false reportings ? I 'm placing my bets on whenever 4chan gets a hold of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long before this will be brought down due to false reportings?I'm placing my bets on whenever 4chan gets a hold of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024414</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265308860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Planting crops, crop rotation, fishing, hunting, agriculture, raising domesticated animals, farming, water conservation, water shed, solar power generation, wind power generation.</p><p>I suppose all of those could be useful to terrorists since they have to eat, feed their families, drink water, irrigate crops, and so forth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Planting crops , crop rotation , fishing , hunting , agriculture , raising domesticated animals , farming , water conservation , water shed , solar power generation , wind power generation.I suppose all of those could be useful to terrorists since they have to eat , feed their families , drink water , irrigate crops , and so forth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Planting crops, crop rotation, fishing, hunting, agriculture, raising domesticated animals, farming, water conservation, water shed, solar power generation, wind power generation.I suppose all of those could be useful to terrorists since they have to eat, feed their families, drink water, irrigate crops, and so forth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020744</id>
	<title>Re:"Removal from the internet"?</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1265287740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Good luck with that.</p><p>No, seriously, all the best to those making a grand attempt to <em>remove</em> something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more. I imagine you'll have many fun years of failure.</p></div><p>Actually, for all practical purposes they can do exactly this.  It transpires that for all practical purposes we have a Great Firewall of Britain - and very few people were aware it even existed until recently:</p><p><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/07/brit\_isps\_censor\_wikipedia/" title="theregister.co.uk">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/07/brit\_isps\_censor\_wikipedia/</a> [theregister.co.uk]</p><p>How it's implemented depends on your ISP.  One or two put up an error page saying "Sorry, you can't look at this" - but most simply block the TCP connection in the first place so it appears to a casual observer like the site in question is down.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck with that.No , seriously , all the best to those making a grand attempt to remove something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more .
I imagine you 'll have many fun years of failure.Actually , for all practical purposes they can do exactly this .
It transpires that for all practical purposes we have a Great Firewall of Britain - and very few people were aware it even existed until recently : http : //www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/07/brit \ _isps \ _censor \ _wikipedia/ [ theregister.co.uk ] How it 's implemented depends on your ISP .
One or two put up an error page saying " Sorry , you ca n't look at this " - but most simply block the TCP connection in the first place so it appears to a casual observer like the site in question is down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck with that.No, seriously, all the best to those making a grand attempt to remove something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more.
I imagine you'll have many fun years of failure.Actually, for all practical purposes they can do exactly this.
It transpires that for all practical purposes we have a Great Firewall of Britain - and very few people were aware it even existed until recently:http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/07/brit\_isps\_censor\_wikipedia/ [theregister.co.uk]How it's implemented depends on your ISP.
One or two put up an error page saying "Sorry, you can't look at this" - but most simply block the TCP connection in the first place so it appears to a casual observer like the site in question is down.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023424</id>
	<title>Re:Me! Me!</title>
	<author>Smauler</author>
	<datestamp>1265304240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are plenty of programs about the French Resistance too, which surely glorify some of their acts.  Our legal system has gone to shit since fucking New Labour got in.  Personal liberty seems to be a forgotten concept.  Also, from TFS : <i>These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists</i> </p><p>Wait...  so if I tell a terrorist "don't blow yourself up", I'm technically breaching the law since I am sharing information with a terrorist that I consider useful.  It's not useful for them to fulfil their terrorist aims, but that's not what TFS says, anyway.  I just reported youtube for showing videos of hate crime, anyway, with a direct link to a CBC video of a hate crime.  I might report the "Female Agents" film website for glorifying terrorism next.  What fun...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are plenty of programs about the French Resistance too , which surely glorify some of their acts .
Our legal system has gone to shit since fucking New Labour got in .
Personal liberty seems to be a forgotten concept .
Also , from TFS : These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists Wait... so if I tell a terrorist " do n't blow yourself up " , I 'm technically breaching the law since I am sharing information with a terrorist that I consider useful .
It 's not useful for them to fulfil their terrorist aims , but that 's not what TFS says , anyway .
I just reported youtube for showing videos of hate crime , anyway , with a direct link to a CBC video of a hate crime .
I might report the " Female Agents " film website for glorifying terrorism next .
What fun.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are plenty of programs about the French Resistance too, which surely glorify some of their acts.
Our legal system has gone to shit since fucking New Labour got in.
Personal liberty seems to be a forgotten concept.
Also, from TFS : These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists Wait...  so if I tell a terrorist "don't blow yourself up", I'm technically breaching the law since I am sharing information with a terrorist that I consider useful.
It's not useful for them to fulfil their terrorist aims, but that's not what TFS says, anyway.
I just reported youtube for showing videos of hate crime, anyway, with a direct link to a CBC video of a hate crime.
I might report the "Female Agents" film website for glorifying terrorism next.
What fun...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021534</id>
	<title>Re:I'd like to report New Labour's web site</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265295000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This might not be such a stupid idea as you might think.</p><p>1) Report any and every website you can find, Labour.org.uk, conservatives.com, bbc.co.uk, itv.com, amazon.co.uk, ebay.co.uk, etc etc<br>2) Repeat, but using tinyurl and other link squashers, proxies, caches, and any other form of URL mangling<br>3) ???<br>4) Collapse!</p><p>There's a recaptcha on the submission page, which is a shame, otherwise I'd have had a script running already. Perhaps I should set up a "recaptcha for pr0n" or more appropriate perhaps, "recaptcha for terrorist information"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>Mind you, given this is our government, there's probably a way to submit without the recaptcha, and probably a way to download the IPs of every submitter, but that's another story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This might not be such a stupid idea as you might think.1 ) Report any and every website you can find , Labour.org.uk , conservatives.com , bbc.co.uk , itv.com , amazon.co.uk , ebay.co.uk , etc etc2 ) Repeat , but using tinyurl and other link squashers , proxies , caches , and any other form of URL mangling3 ) ? ?
? 4 ) Collapse ! There 's a recaptcha on the submission page , which is a shame , otherwise I 'd have had a script running already .
Perhaps I should set up a " recaptcha for pr0n " or more appropriate perhaps , " recaptcha for terrorist information " ; - ) Mind you , given this is our government , there 's probably a way to submit without the recaptcha , and probably a way to download the IPs of every submitter , but that 's another story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This might not be such a stupid idea as you might think.1) Report any and every website you can find, Labour.org.uk, conservatives.com, bbc.co.uk, itv.com, amazon.co.uk, ebay.co.uk, etc etc2) Repeat, but using tinyurl and other link squashers, proxies, caches, and any other form of URL mangling3) ??
?4) Collapse!There's a recaptcha on the submission page, which is a shame, otherwise I'd have had a script running already.
Perhaps I should set up a "recaptcha for pr0n" or more appropriate perhaps, "recaptcha for terrorist information" ;-)Mind you, given this is our government, there's probably a way to submit without the recaptcha, and probably a way to download the IPs of every submitter, but that's another story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022478</id>
	<title>Re:Me! Me!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265299860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's an idea. Overload the system; report every website you go through (hey! That&rsquo;s an idea for a Firefox extension!!!); the &ldquo;authorities&rdquo; will be so much overwhelmed that the whole system will be defeated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's an idea .
Overload the system ; report every website you go through ( hey !
That    s an idea for a Firefox extension ! ! !
) ; the    authorities    will be so much overwhelmed that the whole system will be defeated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's an idea.
Overload the system; report every website you go through (hey!
That’s an idea for a Firefox extension!!!
); the “authorities” will be so much overwhelmed that the whole system will be defeated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31028942</id>
	<title>Re:Perspective</title>
	<author>LSD-OBS</author>
	<datestamp>1265288100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hahaha. Right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hahaha .
Right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hahaha.
Right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021396</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265294160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's go a bit further with this idea of useful to a terrorists. So everything on http://www.wikihow.com should be removed because terrorists are people too. So if it is useful to people it will also be useful to terrorists.</p><p>Anything useful to people should be blacklisted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's go a bit further with this idea of useful to a terrorists .
So everything on http : //www.wikihow.com should be removed because terrorists are people too .
So if it is useful to people it will also be useful to terrorists.Anything useful to people should be blacklisted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's go a bit further with this idea of useful to a terrorists.
So everything on http://www.wikihow.com should be removed because terrorists are people too.
So if it is useful to people it will also be useful to terrorists.Anything useful to people should be blacklisted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022580</id>
	<title>No more Schneier for Britons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265300340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>since Bruce Schneiers  blog is full of terrorist do's and don'ts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>since Bruce Schneiers blog is full of terrorist do 's and don'ts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>since Bruce Schneiers  blog is full of terrorist do's and don'ts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020874</id>
	<title>Re:Report your friends, family and neighbours...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265289480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, let's get wikipedia banned, since that has plenty of material useful for terrorists. By all means it should be blocked under this law, and since every reporter nowadays gets plenty of information from wikipedia, the media will crucify this law in a heartbeat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , let 's get wikipedia banned , since that has plenty of material useful for terrorists .
By all means it should be blocked under this law , and since every reporter nowadays gets plenty of information from wikipedia , the media will crucify this law in a heartbeat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, let's get wikipedia banned, since that has plenty of material useful for terrorists.
By all means it should be blocked under this law, and since every reporter nowadays gets plenty of information from wikipedia, the media will crucify this law in a heartbeat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021208</id>
	<title>Re:A fine sentiment!</title>
	<author>Nathrael</author>
	<datestamp>1265292780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But censorship does not help curb terrorism. Censorship works great for steering popular opinion, but not for dealing with radical elements. Joe Citizen may be put off by a huge flashing sign displaying "This website contains information deemed possibly useful to terrorists, GTFO", but Achmed Terrorist will just find a way around it (or ask his nice friends in the middle east to send him some bomb building manuals or whatnot).<br> <br>If you want to combat terrorism, you have to fight it at it's root: take out radical preachers and terrorist sympathizers (c'mon, it's not like they are hard to find) and promote cultural integration instead of harassing your citizens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But censorship does not help curb terrorism .
Censorship works great for steering popular opinion , but not for dealing with radical elements .
Joe Citizen may be put off by a huge flashing sign displaying " This website contains information deemed possibly useful to terrorists , GTFO " , but Achmed Terrorist will just find a way around it ( or ask his nice friends in the middle east to send him some bomb building manuals or whatnot ) .
If you want to combat terrorism , you have to fight it at it 's root : take out radical preachers and terrorist sympathizers ( c'mon , it 's not like they are hard to find ) and promote cultural integration instead of harassing your citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But censorship does not help curb terrorism.
Censorship works great for steering popular opinion, but not for dealing with radical elements.
Joe Citizen may be put off by a huge flashing sign displaying "This website contains information deemed possibly useful to terrorists, GTFO", but Achmed Terrorist will just find a way around it (or ask his nice friends in the middle east to send him some bomb building manuals or whatnot).
If you want to combat terrorism, you have to fight it at it's root: take out radical preachers and terrorist sympathizers (c'mon, it's not like they are hard to find) and promote cultural integration instead of harassing your citizens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022230</id>
	<title>You aren't clever. Really.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265298600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there is one thing that annoys me it is when some airhead imagines that they are the only one to have spotted the obvious.</p><p>"intended to be" can be interpreted differently by different people. They are weasel words which mean one thing to one set of people and something quite different to another set.</p><p>Stop being dim.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there is one thing that annoys me it is when some airhead imagines that they are the only one to have spotted the obvious .
" intended to be " can be interpreted differently by different people .
They are weasel words which mean one thing to one set of people and something quite different to another set.Stop being dim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there is one thing that annoys me it is when some airhead imagines that they are the only one to have spotted the obvious.
"intended to be" can be interpreted differently by different people.
They are weasel words which mean one thing to one set of people and something quite different to another set.Stop being dim.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31032456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31028942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31026024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31045186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31044862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0144233_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31026024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020744
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025342
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021612
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31024562
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020724
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31025384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022756
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31044862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31031406
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022206
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31032456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021362
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021044
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31023424
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31045186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31022478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020604
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0144233.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31020812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31021956
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0144233.31028942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
