Xref: utzoo talk.politics.misc:7659 misc.legal:4063 alt.flame:1730
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!labrea!agate!ucbvax!BOSCO.BERKELEY.EDU!lazarus
From: lazarus@BOSCO.BERKELEY.EDU
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Historical and Geographic inaccuracies.
Message-ID: <8802261821.AA01476@jiff>
Date: 26 Feb 88 18:21:47 GMT
References: <2445@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <6385@oberon.USC.EDU> <995@stratus.UUCP> <792@athos.rutgers.edu> <613@crcmar.crc.uucp> <2642@gryphon.CTS.COM> <3097@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: jiff!lazarus (Andrew J Lazarus)
Organization: Math Dept., UC Berkeley
Lines: 16

In article <3097@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> lazarus@athena.mit.edu (Michael Friedman) writes:
>In article <2642@gryphon.CTS.COM> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>}He had a diplomatic passport, no ?

>I don't think so. The key point for the British was that their people
>were being held hostage by Libya. 

Yes, he did.
And furthermore, there was no way to enter the embassy to
compel his surrender [anti-Soviet refugees in our embassy, Mike?],
or the forcibly interrogate witnesses inside the embassy.
(Look it up, Mike....)
The British granted diplomatic immunity to the officials in the
Libyan Embassy even though Ghaddafi labelled it a 'People's Bureau',
not an embassy. After this incident the embassy was closed.
andy