<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/20/2012 8:43 PM, Roland Perry
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:JIw7AtIe8jMQFAac@internetpolicyagency.com"
type="cite">In message <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:50323028.7010006@cafonso.ca"><50323028.7010006@cafonso.ca></a>, at
09:40:08 on Mon, 20 Aug 2012, Carlos A. Afonso
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ca@cafonso.ca"><ca@cafonso.ca></a> writes
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Yes, really simple, unless... the UK
announced its stupid intention to
<br>
storm the Embassy.
<br>
</blockquote>
<b><br>
Except they didn't announce any intentions, just recounted some
circumstances (which don't apply to this case) </b></blockquote>
<br>
So if there were no intentions, and it does not relate to the
present circumstances, why did they recount and publish it now?<br>
<br>
And for a third time on this list I quote:<br>
<br>
" For more than 19 months now, the Swedish government has refused to
explain why he could not be questioned in the UK."<br>
<br>
Why not calm the storm by responding to this 19 month old question?<br>
<br>
<br>
Norbert Klein<br>
Cambodia<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>