In buy generic lumigan my years of working with clients, so many people are order discount gel online pleasantly surprised at how much easier it is to lose tetracycline weight and maintain it once they pay more attention to tizanidine online the quality of their diet instead of how many calories buy cheap ampicillin or carbohydrate grams they eat." MNT next spoke with Dr. discount spiriva J. Wes Ulm, a bioinformatic scientific resource analyst, and biomedical buy discount pamoate online data specialist at the National Institutes of Health, about the pyrantel pamoate FDA approval. They will then typically perform respiratory function tests buy cialis no rx to determine the effect of asthma on the person's airways. order cheapest zithromax low cost dosage Although scientists have developed several treatment options for UC, research lowest price for cialis on new treatments continues. There are many triggers that can lead.

First, the Chinese Internet censors are back to work following a bit of a break to buff the country’s image during the Olympic games. As of a few days ago, the New York Times web site became inaccessible from inside China. The press couldn’t get a comment from the government, but in the past, it has said that other countries regulate the Internet too. (Thus equating child pornography with the New York Times. Oh well, that’s what totalitarianism is about.)

And second, Gatehouse media, which publishes some suburban newspapers, has sued the New York Times because boston.com (the site of the Boston Globe, which is owned by the Times) was linking to some local stories in the Gatehouse publications. Just listing the headlines, with live link to the Gatehouse publications’ original stories. The legal issues are several — see this good analysis from the Citizen Media Law Project. It’s hard to think that what the Globe is doing is not well within “fair use” from a copyright standpoint. But either way, strategically it’s a head-scratcher. The Globe is steering traffic to the sites of obscure suburban newspapers almost no one reads. As the eloquent David Weinberger asks, why would those papers want that stopped?

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 24th, 2008 at 3:21 pm and is filed under Censorship and free speech, Miscellaneous. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.