<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 77.95pt 1.0in 77.95pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Milton<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Aha, "suspected" consensus (is this a new version of
"declared<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> consensus? ;-)) Hmmm, of the huge masses of 6 or 7 people who have<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> addressed this issue, 3 or 4, including Ken and Adam, have agreed
to<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> abandon the U-word.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>It was nothing to do with an IGC process or anything... but this was
really the first time I had heard anyone at all speak clearly against universal
service obligations as a policy position, and so said this to make a point
about how hopelessly a position against USOs is in a minority in the civil society
space that we discuss this issue. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>>Hmmm, of the huge masses of 6 or 7 people who have<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> addressed this issue, 3 or 4, including Ken and Adam, have agreed
to<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> abandon the U-word.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>They spoke about ‘abandoning’ the 'universalization' term,
and not universal access. I have made the distinction in my last email. There
is no point repeating the same thing. And I am very sure that both Ken and Adam
strongly support universal access obligations/ funds. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >[ MM asserts] that<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > universal service obligations, in some way or the other, are
not<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> required for universal<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > access.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> That's not what I said. What I said was that calling for universal<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> access without an institutional framework to define it, deliver
and<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> enforce USOs, and without a price tag, is meaningless rhetoric,
and that<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> it risks being confused with retrograde policies.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Calling for markets to be left alone in the area of Internet access,
without any public interventions, without understanding the complexities and diversities
of the situations in developing countries is no less rhetorical. It is just
hegemony of ideology that one position is made to sound like normal and natural,
and the other unnatural, and abnormal, and therefore requiring special justifications.
We wont give up progressive efforts in the South to mitigate risks on ‘policy
confusion’ in the North. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Speaking about institutional frameworks to enforce, what framework do
we have globally to enforce FoE, it is almost entirely subject to national jurisdictions,
so why waste out time????<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> I don't have time to go on. Economic decisions are all about
incremental<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> growth, budget constraints, efficiency and trade offs.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> But this is based on fallacious economic thinking and illustrates<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> perfectly why I am resisting your rhetorical incursions into
universal<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> access policy.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>You can sit in the US and say whatever. India is rolling out its Common
Services Centres (1,00,000 of them) to reach connectively along with its
paraphernalia to rural India. And most developing countries are developing some
such programs. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>I think you can just not see the Internet as an important social and development
infrastructure, especially for developing countries, which therefore often
require special ‘public’ support. I know the issue is not
about just Internet. You don’t see ‘development’ as anything else
than a process where people and communities are freed from the state’s oppression,
and then things just take off… Overwhelmingly, development in developing countries,
as was in developed countries when they were developing, is seen as a process that
require significant ‘public’ planning and support. This difference
of view is the real issue here, and we are fighting a proxy battle on ‘universal
access to the internet’ issue. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>I would willingly donate the entire US Iraq war budget to Indian<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> telecom development<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>I am willing to receive it </span></font><font face=Wingdings><span
style='font-family:Wingdings'>J</span></font>. Thanks, while we work out the
modalities. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Parminder <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> -----Original Message-----</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu]</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2008 3:39 AM</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> To: governance@lists.cpsr.org; Parminder</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Subject: RE: [governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic]
programme</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > -----Original Message-----</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > From: Parminder [mailto:parminder@itforchange.net]</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> ></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > Ideology cannot be separated from advocacy, so that's fine.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> :-) But ideological disagreements will almost certainly prevent
you from</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> filing an advocacy statement in this instance.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > And status quo needs to change, and any time is as good as
another. I</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > suspect close to 90 percent people on this list do not agree
with you</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> [snip]</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > So why the will of such a small minority should keep</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > prevailing in and informing our group's positions?</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Aha, "suspected" consensus (is this a new version of
"declared</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> consensus? ;-)) Hmmm, of the huge masses of 6 or 7 people who have</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> addressed this issue, 3 or 4, including Ken and Adam, have agreed
to</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> abandon the U-word.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >[ MM asserts] that</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > universal service obligations, in some way or the other, are
not</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> required for universal</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > access.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> That's not what I said. What I said was that calling for universal</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> access without an institutional framework to define it, deliver
and</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> enforce USOs, and without a price tag, is meaningless rhetoric,
and that</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> it risks being confused with retrograde policies.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > Access to Internet in the developing is not following the
same path as</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > mobile telephony did, and there are some very good reasons</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > for it. Although</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > even universal access to telephony has almost always needed</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > support of USOs</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > or some other policy instruments, almost everywhere in the
world.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Universal access does not exist anywhere in the world, except
perhaps</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> for a few very dense inner cities.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> But that of course depends on how you define it.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > India is a perfectly peaceful country, with a relatively open</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > market. As for spread of rural broadband - nothing is
happening even</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> with</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > such excess of backbone capacity that you cant imagine. A
little more</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> than 1</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > percent of India fiber optic backbone capacity is used today.
And</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> fibre</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > runs within 50-60 KM of most Indian villages. But this has
not</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> translated</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > to access to</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > Internet/ broadband for rural Indians. I am enclosing the</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > presentation I</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > made to the UN Commission on Science and Technology for</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > Development last</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > month where I trace 4 stages of 'policy understanding' for
universal</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > Internet access in India. It has been clearly established</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > that even supply</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > side policies (what to say markets alone) are not sufficient</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > for spread of</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> > broadband in rural areas, and demand side polices are
required.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> But this is based on fallacious economic thinking and illustrates</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> perfectly why I am resisting your rhetorical incursions into
universal</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> access policy. To say that fiber backbones run within 50 km of
most</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Indian villages implies that it would be easy and cheap to connect
them</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> all (tens of thousands, right? or is it hundreds of thousands of</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> villages?) But the vast majority of the costs associated with
providing</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> access are in the electronics and gear and labor associated with
the</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> so-called last mile. And what happens after you have spent this
enormous</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> amount? Where does the money come from? And how many PCs are in
those</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> villages? Will you pay for those, too? How much traffic will those</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> villages generate? How much of that infrastructure will they be
able to</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> sustain through subscription charges? Or will it all be free? Does
India</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> have the money to do this? What if the investment was wasted, and
a it</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> is not used and a cheaper technology comes along 18 months later?
You've</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> just pissed away someone's health care or education funds.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Further, You have decided that fixed-line Internet access is all
that</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> counts. But it may be that, in a few years, mobile internet access
can</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> reach all these villages at a tiny fraction of the cost.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> I don't have time to go on. Economic decisions are all about
incremental</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> growth, budget constraints, efficiency and trade offs. I am in
favor of</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> universal access, but that and a $1.69 will get you a cup of
coffee.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Indeed, I would willingly donate the entire US Iraq war budget to
Indian</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> telecom development under your administration, I guess if we are
going</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> to waste $100 billion a year we may as well give it to someone
with good</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> intentions.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>