Daniel,

Daniel,

I’m back to your article on the Sudan elections meeting organised in Washington three days ago.

I understand your principal concern to make a comprehensive coverage when you wrote yesterday paper.

What you did is always seen by many others as best ways to give an accurate picture about what happened.
However, I believe that no one could cover all the interesting things he heard. Otherwise he needs to make several papers.
I such situation the best to do is to focus on what said by the most important orator and to build a paper starting from the most important point he raised (totally subjective criteria).

Here we have Richard Williamson, the US President envoy to Sudan. He and others tackled the issue of the 2009 election, what is better to hold it or not. Darfur and southern Sudan are the two parameters.

From what Williamson said we can evoke what the other said and remind the different positions.

As you know I made this comment with the thought that I can help to improve you approach and to