<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
1. May I say that I am thoroughly enjoying this debate.<br>
2. I think Parminder won this round. <br>
3. Hopefully that will goad Milton into having another round...<br>
:-) Important questions.<br>
Stephanie Perrin<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014-10-09, 1:03, parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:54361733.8050906@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Milton<br>
<br>
There are two levels to this discussion, one is a simple
argumentative-ness, and a second one which in my view address
the key issue of who or which actors can and should be
considered as the primary target of global civil society
advocacy, as being the prime threats to the kind of global
Internet that we want to see in global public interest. And an
associated question being, which actors are blocking rightful
public interest governance of the global Internet. <br>
<br>
I will first respond in this email to your largely superficial
if not misleading arguments</font><font face="Verdana"><font
face="Verdana">, and address the key underlying question in my
next email. excuse my indulgence.... parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
</font></font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 05 October 2014 11:53 PM,
Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="_MailEndCompose"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:4.8pt"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>parminder<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Throughout this email, you seamlessly move between UN
based international law making and US law making, which
may get forced on the world bec of the US's economic and
technical might, as if there isnt any real substantive
difference between the two... <span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">MM:
Nope. I make it very clear when I am talking about one
or the other. Your point was “the U.S.” was preventing
us from talking about certain issues. My contention was
simply that the U.S. is talking about those things
extensively at its own domestic level, and that indeed,
many of those dialogues originated in the U.S. and went
transnational. No confusion as to levels.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: No. I said, and I quote "We badly need a global discussions
on and adoption of a model law on IP based telecommunications, and
on net neutrality. But any such possibility will be resisted tooth
and nail, and a lot of resources thrown into it." <br>
<br>
What I am saying is that US and its cohorts prevent global
discussion and *adoption* of needed public policy frameworks in
the IG space... Do you content this statement. if you do, lets
focus our discussion on that. Or else, concede.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">When did I say there is no global
discussion on net neutrality ?<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">MM:
In your original post. Glad to see you backing off here.
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: Can you please quote me, instead of insisting that I said
something which I did not, and then saying I am backing off.....
What I said is quoted above, I never said "there is no global
discussion on net neutrality". It would be stupid to say that - I
myself am a member of two global coalitions on NN. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">... As for the resistance to it and the
resources thrown in for that sake I have historical
details of how an NN debate and position forming got
resisted on the IGC list as well in the MAG, for years,
before it was finally taken up this year, <span
style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">MM:
Another factual error. See this, a NN workshop from
2011: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article?id=883:ig4d-workshop-183-a-possible-framework-for-global-net-neutrality">http://intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article?id=883:ig4d-workshop-183-a-possible-framework-for-global-net-neutrality</a></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: Again, I do know there have been workshops on NN at the
IGF.... One of them, at Baku, was actually organised by me for
ITfC. Can you stop producing meaningless and diversionary
'evidence'.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes, I know the European Commission as
well as Council of Europe has been working on it, and I
have participated especially in the latter's effort. <span
style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">MM:
So apparently the “US” effort to prevent discussion has
failed there, too. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: Yes, US does get away with everything it wants. We all know
that. But it has succeeding in stopping NN being taken up at any
truly global policy making/ framing forum, and you know that. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Well, yes. How much ever may I like to,
we are just not able to come off the colonial and post
colonial yoke. Dont we still take everything of worth from
the west? <span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">MM:
A typical Parminderism. Someone notes the irony of you
claiming the “the U.S.” is stopping us from discussing
an issue that is being actively discussed in large part
because of US domestic politics, and you transmute that
into a claim that everything of worth originates from
the West. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: I repeat, US does try its best that global Internet related
public policy issues are not discussed and taken up by globally
democratic forums in any manner that could move towards their
global democratic resolution. As for your assertion that many of
these issues are beign discussed globally "becuase of US domestic
politics", this just betrays the symptoms of the very regrettable
diseases of seeing the US as the centre of the world that many US
policy makers, and policy commentators suffer from. It is not
going to be very useful, but still let me repeat - we discuss
Internet public policy issues globally becuase they impact us and
not becuase ofUS domestic politics...<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Apart from US and its corporate allies
being the chief instigators for filtering the debates at
the IGF, <span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">MM:
The chief instigators of filtering debates at the IGF
are those who don’t want to disturb the IG status quo,
as you know well. But that camp includes people in
Europe, Latin America, Africa, Asia as well as “the
U.S.”</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS:Has it not been amply clear that the US political and business
establishment leads the pack and is its epicentre..<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
I’ve run up against those filters as much as you have,
btw, only about 5 years before you. Ask yourself why I
wasn’t asked to be on the IANA transition panel at
either Netmundial or IGF, for example. But I am from the
US. Why didn’t they welcome a fellow imperialist
hegemonic white male? How do you explain this, my
friend? </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: You are slipping into a rhetoric which has no connection to
anything I may have said. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Maybe
there are substantive policy differences at stake that
cannot be reduced to 1970s-vintage state-centric
worldviews? </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: Interesting! Ask Snowden how state-centric the world still
is.. That is just one example. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Maybe
“the US” is the wrong label to be using to characterize
your enemies? Your whole mentality is still locked into
the nation-state mindset. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: This point will be addressed in my next email,<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The US rules the global Internet,
politically and economically . Any civil society actor
whose chief aim is a better distribution of power (that at
least is what civil society used to be) would naturally
make the US as its chief target.<span
style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">MM:
But redistributing power to whom, and for what purpose?
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: To people, for their benefit. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
First, it is obvious that you are talking exclusively
about a redistribution of power among nation-states</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: Where is it obvious? However, yes nation states are one of
the main vehicles of such redistribution, since they are still the
primary vehicle of people's democratic representation ( the US
constitution’s "we the people..") . And seeking to dismantle this
system of democratic representation without building a more
democratic one is one of the most important contemporary
strategies to check redistribution of power towards the people. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
– an approach that is intrinsically hostile to civil
society. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: Please expand this.... I think the hostility is to the rule
of free unregulated market which is basically rule of big
business... It is the latter's increasing power that is hostile to
civil society ..<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
Further, I don’t think a redistribution that, say,
strengthens the Russian or Chinese states is anything to
get excited about</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS:To the extent that it can decrease illegitimate US's political
and economic power (heard to the recent BRICS bank, you sure would
say it is inherently hostile to 'civil society', right!) . To the
extent it may empower the state vis a vis its own people, no....
Two different battles, bot important. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
– or haven’t you kept your eyes on what is happening in
Hong Kong? Perhaps you will follow Putin and Xi and
blame all the HK unrest of “the U.S.”?</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
PJS: Slipping again into unsustainable rhetoric... Since when
market fundamentalism has become revolutions friendly... I fully
support the HK democratic movement, and so do colleagues inside HK
who work with us. BTW, the only comment on the HK unrest I saw in
IG lsits was one of Michael Gurstein showing detials of HK's
Internet speeds etc and wondering whether it had to do with the
protests. The whole multistakeholderist group and the Internet
freedom did not utter a word... So, dont create accusations which
have no basis... <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
All part of our attempt to maintain global hegemony. So
let’s suppress freedom and democracy in Hong Kong so we
have a better distribution of power? </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
PJS: Milton, you need to do better than this.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I
don’t think strengthening the Indian or Turkish or South
African states is such a great idea, either. All of them
seem to be more interested in Internet control than
anything else. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Good, you were not able to bring yourself to mention India :) ..
Anyway, nation state is a complex reality, and a general one kind
of branding versus other may not help. Context matters. Within
South Africa, almost all reform movements will be aimed against
the state (happens in India and we participate in so many of
them.).. At the global level, it is the US political and economic
establishment which undoubtedly has the greatest concentration of
power and this the greatest threat. In confronting this threat,
most developing country governments can be used as allies. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Again
I ask you to frame your debate and discourse in terms of
substantive policy choices and not polarized power blocs
centered on nation-states.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well, I greatly admire the US as a nation of people. My problem is
with its political and economic might which is overbearing and a
threat to the world. As for substantive policy choices just go to
the<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.justnetcoalition.org/"> Just Net Coalition
website</a>, and read its <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration">Delhi
Declaration</a> as well as more than 20 statements made by it in
the last 6 months. And if you find another IG group which is
clearer and more profuse in offering policy choices let me know.
All I have heard most IG groups is just saying over and over
again, in with multistakeholder-ism, down with UN... Hardly a
portfolio of "substantive policy choices".<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
Your mode of discourse is essentially a Cold War
mentality, where our political choices are centered on
being for or against the US. <br>
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
In fact it is entirely post cold war, where the US has become a
unipolar political and economic power, with no brakes or
constraints, which is leading to an unsustainable concentration of
power. The global Internet, born post cold war, is its prime
example. Pity that there are so many in the global civil society
that side with this greatest concentration of power on the global
Internet "against civil society interests" to quote your somewhat
flippant phrase.<br>
<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5cc07bf192ce484fb6fcec8d03508871@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>