However, get cheapest retin-a low price canada in LPR, the acid travels through the esophagus and into buy ventolin the throat, causing throat and airway symptoms. If any of find discount griseofulvin online the following medical conditions or other health factors are relevant glyburide without prescription to you, talk with your doctor before using Synthroid or buy glyburide pills levothyroxine. Seizures are the only symptom of epilepsy, and research discount betnovate shows that there is a link with Parkinson's disease. Some tablet tizanidine can increase a person's risk of developing certain cancers, including get cheap cialis best price tablet cervical cancer, vulvar cancer, and penile cancer. Antipsychotics and other discount azor drugs may help alleviate their aggression but do not address low cost diovan their underlying cause. Oral thrush in the esophagus, the tube amoxicillin uk connecting the throat and stomach, is one of the most buy discount viagra common infections to affect people with HIV. It may be diclofenac sale difficult for many people to access fertility services such as order serevent lowest price dosage ART due to its high cost and limited coverage by purchase cheap cialis sale overdose private insurance and Medicaid. However, doctors may recommend other types of.

Because the Internet is like so many different technologies in different ways, it incites a variety of anxieties, and a corresponding variety of responses. Governments’ responses are often poorly thought out over-reactions — poorly thought out and little discussed. The past week’s news gives two astounding examples.

In India, a law innocuously called the Information Technology (Amendment) Bill 2006″ allows the government to intercept any form of electronic communications — email, text messages, or cell phone conversations — in order to investigate “any offence.” This is a post-Mumbai anti-terrorism measure, but like the USA PATRIOT Act, it is utterly lacking in provisions that would restrain the abuse of government authority. It was passed quietly, after little debate. Here is a blogger’s account of the bill (India sleepwalks to total surveillance”), and here is an editorial from the Times of India that backs up the blogger’s horrified reaction (“License to Snoop,” which begins, “Big Brother could¬†really¬†be watching”).

Meanwhile, the Times of London reports:

THE Home Office has quietly adopted a new plan to allow police across Britain routinely to hack into people’s personal computers without a warrant.

Now it’s not clear what that actually means (are the police going start sending malware via email, just like the bad guys do to steal your account information and passwords?). But the trend is unmistakable: Even in major democracies, law enforcement so fears what people are saying over the Internet that it wants complete access to all of them, with only the cops deciding whether the surveillance and searches are justified.

The price is too high for such measures to be adopted without public discussion. In the U.S., let’s hope for better.

This entry was posted on Monday, January 5th, 2009 at 5:01 pm and is filed under The Internet and the Web, The role of government—laws and regulations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.