SG shithole pee sai Internet Blackout:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Singapore#List_of_banned_websites
Internet censorship in Singapore
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Internet censorship in Singapore is carried out by the
Media Development Authority (MDA). Internet services provided by the three major
Internet service providers (ISPs) are subject to regulation by the MDA, which requires blocking of a symbolic number of websites containing "mass impact objectionable" material, including
Playboy,
YouPorn and
Ashley Madison.
[1] The civil service, tertiary instituitions and
Institute of Technical Education has its own jurisdiction to block websites displaying pornography, information about drugs and online piracy.
Contents
History
Political and racially-sensitive content is frequently censored in Singapore, resulting in a
chilling effect on bloggers and academics active on social media.
[2][3][4] The early to mid-2000s saw the rising popularity of satire websites such as
TalkingCock.com and blogs like
YawningBread and
mrbrown, which offered alternative perspectives on socio-political issues from government-friendly mainstream media.
[5] In July 2006, mrbrown's weekly column in newspaper
Today was terminated after he highlighted the immediate price hikes after the
2006 Singapore general elections. Prime Minister
Lee Hsien Loong said mrbrown's column had ‘‘hit out wildly at the government and in a very mocking and dismissive sort of tone’’ and
Minister for Information, Communication and the Arts sent a letter saying his article could undermine national stability, and that it was "not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the government".
[6][7] In 2012, blogger
Alex Au was made by the
Attorney General's Chambers and prime minister
Lee Hsien Loong to remove his blog posts and apologise several times for various issues, including his questioning of the judicial sentencing of doctor
Woffles Wu for a traffic offence, as well as his observations of the saga involving the sale of the ruling party's town councils' software to an IT firm.
[8][9] He was subsequently charged for
scandalising the judiciary in 2015 for suggesting judicial partiality towards two constitutional challenges against the Singapore
law criminalising sex between men in his blog posts.
[10][11]
In 2013, Singapore enacted a law requiring licenses for news sites that report regularly on the country, a move that critics of the ruling
People’s Action Party see as an attempt to silence online dissent.
[12] Sites which satisfy the criteria must also put up a performance bond of $50,000, and are expected to remove content that is that is perceived by the MDA to be against the public interest, public security, or national harmony within 24 hours.
[13] Aside from the online websites of state-owned newspapers, socio-political websites and news providers such as Yahoo Singapore,
[14] The Online Citizen,
[15] Mothership.sg,
[16] The Independent Singapore,
[17] The Middle Ground
[18] were all approached to register for the class license.
Cases
In July 2001, Dr Tan Chong Kee, the founder of
Sintercom, was asked to register the website under the nascent Singapore
Broadcast Authority Act (now
Media Development Authority). Dr Tan chose to shut down Sintercom due to concerns over the ambiguity of the Act.
[19][20]
In 2015, a video made by the
Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), titled "Pappy Washing Powder", was deemed a party political film and thus prohibited under the Films Act.
[21]
Sedition Act
See also:
Sedition Act (Singapore)
The Sedition Act inherited from the colonial era is also used to charge internet users deemed to have promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said the law was necessary to preserve Singapore's racial and religious harmony as ethnic tensions in South-east Asia may give rise to Islamic terrorism.
[22] There is continuing debate on whether the use of the Act will have a chilling effect on public debate on the Internet.
[23] A 2012 survey from Blackbox Research showed that 75% of the respondents felt that there was no need for legal action against racist online commenters, with 59% saying a formal warning should suffice for a first-time offender, and 16% indicating that it was sufficient to publicly shame them online.
[24]
In September 2005, three people were arrested and charged under the
Sedition Act for posting
racist comments on the Internet.
[25] It was the first time the Act was invoked in Singapore for a decade and the first use by the government against individuals.
[26][27]
In 2012, an assistant director at
National Trades Union Congress membership department was fired for racist comments in Facebook. In a separate incident, a Chinese student was fined for his abusive comments towards Singaporeans.
[28][29]
In the same year, Singaporean cartoonist Leslie Chew was charged with sedition for alleging official discrimination against the Malay population, on his Facebook page Demon-cratic Singapore.
[30] He was charged again for
contempt of court for several cartoons questioning Singapore courts for their differential treatment, based on status of nationality and political affiliation of the defendants. The
Sedition Act carries a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment and a fine of S$5,000 (US $3,939) if found guilty. However the government later withdrew the charge. Chew states that he “was interrogated for over 30 hours and placed under island arrest for 3 months and (had) to report for bail extension 6 times during that period.”
[31]
In other incidents, teenagers and expatriates were arrested by the
Singapore police over derogatory, offensive, abusive or threatening comments posted on social media.
[32][33][34]
Academic Cherian George noted that in most cases, state action to prosecute individuals was instigated by complaints from members of the public, and the offensive content were spread further by those reporting the offence. He argued that the internet users should be able to partake in open debates and opinion leaders can make a collective stand against ideas contrary to Singaporean ethos, without the need for government to intervene and censor or punish.
[35]
Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act
The Computer Misuse Act (CMA) was introduced in 1993 and its offence provisions are based primarily on the United Kingdom’s 1990 legislation of the same name.
[36] In the years since, the government has taken a much tougher stand on Internet-related matters, including censorship. Amendments to the
Penal Code in 2006 hold Internet users liable for "causing public mischief", and give the authorities broader powers in regulating Internet content.
[37][38] Following the
2013 Singapore cyberattacks, the Computer Misuse Act was renamed to Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act.
List of banned websites
The MDA maintains a list of 100 banned websites. The number of websites banned is symbolic and will not change under current legislation.
[39] When trying to access a blocked site, visitors are usually greeted by a green box MDA message "This website is not available as it violates the laws in Singapore" (for Remote Gambling Act 2014 / Obscene Materials Act 1997), although separate systems such as
BlueCoat Web Filtering Service also have an error screen. Certain ISP (MyRepublic/M1/ViewQuest) also have "Error 404 - Site blocked". The MDA message is only applicable to public places and office buildings. The Site Blocked message is applicable to most homes.
[40]
In 2005, the MDA banned a gay website and fined another website following complaints that the sites contained offensive content. The banned website is said to have promoted promiscuous sexual behaviour and recruited underage boys for sex and nude photography.
[41]
Since 8 July 2014, sites infringing
copyright have also been blocked.[
citation needed]
On 7 October 2014, the government passed the "Remote Gambling Act".
[42] Under the new law it is an offence, punishable by jail terms and fines, for people to place bets on overseas gambling websites from Singapore. Advertisements for gambling websites are also outlawed. The law took effect on 1 February 2015 when several hundred remote gambling websites were blocked.
[43]
Circumvention software
See also:
Internet censorship circumvention
In order to get around the government's control of the Internet, citizens have developed numerous techniques. Software applications for circumventing web-blocking are readily available.
Tor is in use through software including
xB Browser and
Vidalia, and a number of other proxy solutions including
Proxify.
Freenet is another popular solution available for free download from the Internet.
GOM, a
browser extension, is circumvention software specifically made for use in
Singapore.
[44]
Institutional blocks
The Ministry of Education (MOE) and individual tertiary educational providers impose censorship on individuals using their internet networks, with the help of filtering services for websites. Websites labelled under certain categories, such as criminal skills, pornography, cults/occult, extreme/obscene/violent and gambling were not viewable in these institutions. Socio-political blogger mrbrown's site was briefly blocked by the MOE for being labelled as 'extreme'.
[45]
