..
Your "correction" is still wrong, but I would expect that of you.


Ok, then... how is it wrong?


I am going to venture a guess (not being a mensan lawyer genius doctor from
Oxford):
extradition *request*?
After all, how does one *order* another country to hand over their prisoner,
as if the penalty for failure to comply would be...war? In that case, there
would be no such treaties. The USA would simply issue extradition ORDERS and
the other countries would quickly comply! ;-)




No, seriously, I think the confusion has resulted from paranoid self-delusion
on the part of Mr. Houlsby, wherein he has taken his comment that he "has
nothing to lose by hanging out here," and somehow imagined that Don's "call for
peace" was in some way a threat. to disprove the part, "nothing to lose".
I'm serious. I believe Houlsby has somehow twisted the facts in precisely this
way, for no other explanation of his "logic" makes any sense.




BTW, I have seen the latest edition of Mark's "troll" list, and everyone I
ever knew is on it. For a copy, send a SASE and $15 for the full set (fifteen
floppies). Or I could just post here the only two names which are not on his
list (Mark Houlsby and Nick Bourbaki).
Reminds me of "The Waltons," a TV series where there were two sisters who
thought everyone in the world but themselves were "pixilated."