<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Paul,<div><br></div><div>On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:58 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:</div><div><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">If <i><u>access to</u></i> the internet is NOT a human right, then governments can arbitrarily block access to the internet without due process of law of any kind.<br><br>I am confused as to why anyone on this list or elsewhere would deny that "access to" the internet is a human right OTHER THAN the acknowledged confusion of when "access to" is interpreted as meaning "government-paid access to." <br>
<br>But the key language in this debate in recent days has not, to the best of my memory, ever raised the question of whether :"<i>government-paid</i> access to the internet is a human right."<br></blockquote></div><br></div><div><div>Who is the "government" in your scenario, and "whose" money does it spend?</div></div><div><br></div><div>Daniel</div></body></html>