Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Government The Internet News Your Rights Online

Malaysian Government Wants Internet Filtering 113

Posted by Soulskill
from the it's-fashionable-these-days dept.
adewolf tips news that the government of Malaysia is looking into the development of an internet filtering program. According to a Reuters report, "A vibrant Internet culture has contributed to political challenges facing the government, which tightly controls mainstream media and has used sedition laws and imprisonment without trial to prosecute a blogger." The Malaysian government insists that such a filter would only be used to block pornography, though critics of the plan expect it would be wielded as a political tool, censoring websites that are critical of the current administration. "An industry source says the government could impose the filters late this year or in 2010, coinciding with the rollout of a high-speed broadband network run by Telekom Malaysia. Malaysia aims to increase broadband penetration to half of all homes by 2010 as part of its drive to boost economic efficiency."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Malaysian Government Wants Internet Filtering

Comments Filter:
  • Is it too late to note that none of these problems would occur if we adopted ipv6? "Mandatory encryption", being the most obvious benefit.

  • by reporter (666905) on Friday August 07, 2009 @11:25PM (#28993751) Homepage
    Together with Iran and Turkey, Malaysia will soon be filtering its Internet content. The common thread among all 3 countries is that the majority of their citizens are Muslims.

    Approaching this matter from another angle, we see that Vietnam, China, and North Korea censor the Internet. The common thread among all 3 countries is that the majority of their citizens subscribes to Confucianism. Confucianism is a quasi-religion. In it, you are told how and what to think.

    Is there a causal relation? Do the governments of countries inhabitated by strongly, religious people tend to filter Internet content?

    Note that Russia, despite its brutal form of government, does not filter the Internet. You can write whatever you want in an Internet forum. The Kremlin censors mainly television.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Together with Iran and Turkey, Malaysia will soon be filtering its Internet content. The common thread among all 3 countries is that the majority of their citizens are Muslims.

      but what about china and australia.

      thats 5 countries and the internet is still kinda young. this is a trend that is just getting worse.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 07, 2009 @11:38PM (#28993813)

      Seems to me the "common thread" between all 6 of the countries you mention is their governments fear dissent. There are plenty of Muslim and Confucian majority countries that do not censor the Internet.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        You must admit, though, that religion provides a convenient and inexplicably politically-correct excuse for fostering repressive government and xenophobic belligerence.

        For example, we should thank The Family [wikipedia.org] and those like them for the downfall of America.

        Yours in trolling,

        --Ethanol-fueled

        captcha: descends

        • by Pseudonym (62607)

          You must admit, though, that religion provides a convenient and inexplicably politically-correct excuse for fostering repressive government and xenophobic belligerence.

          The fear of terrorism is far more convenient, don't you think? Greater atrocities were committed in the last decade in the name of "freedom" and "democracy" than most religious fundamentalists could ever accomplish.

      • by clarkkent09 (1104833) * on Saturday August 08, 2009 @12:43AM (#28994043)
        Which Muslim countries do not censor the Internet?

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Internet_blackholes.svg [wikipedia.org]
        • by mo0s3 (1563877)
          For what it's worth, Brunei, Niger, Mali, Mauritania, Western Sahara, Guinea Bissau, Guinea, Gambia, Djibouti, Lebanon, Kosovo. I know some of those probably don't have the resources to implement heavy censortship but just thought I'd respond to the question. Also there are others that are classified by that as "Under Surveillance" (like Australia) and others classified as "Some censorship" like the USA and the UK. From a cursory glance at that map it seems there are about eight Muslim countries classifie
          • For what it's worth

            Not much really since those countries are unrepresentative of the Muslim world, and most, as you said, are mostly small and poor and don't have much internet access or facilities to censor it. Kosovo is arguably not a country as only a minority of the world's countries recognize it and it is under international (UN but in reality NATO) rule so it's not up to them, while Bosnia can't be called a Muslim country as only one third of the population are Muslims. On the other hand most of the
            • by donaldm (919619)

              Australia is the ONLY non-Muslim and non-totalitarian, country that falls under either of those two classifications. Something to think about for you Aussies out there.

              I have heard some of the people who want this speak, they are very eloquent and I think they genuinely believe they are doing the right thing. The problem is they keep harping on about the evils of child porn to get their point across to the point where you start to look for that monocle or small moustache.

            • by mo0s3 (1563877)

              For what it's worth Not much really since those countries are unrepresentative of the Muslim world ... On the other hand most of the *major* Muslim countries (not counting the occupied Iraq and Afghanistan) are classified as either black holes or under surveillance.

              Black holes: Tunisia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Heavy Surveillance: Syria, Libya, Yemen,Bahrain, UAE, Malaysia, Tajikistan. Fair points about Kosovo and Bosnia, but I don't know what you mean by 'unrepresentative' with respect to the previously listed countries. If by 'major' Muslim countries you mean the ones that make it to the news in the West, then fair enough, they are very restrictive, but if you look at the religious values espoused by the inhabitants of these countries a

          • by cpghost (719344)

            For what it's worth, Brunei, Niger, Mali, Mauritania, Western Sahara, Guinea Bissau, Guinea, Gambia, Djibouti, Lebanon, Kosovo.

            Western Sahara is not an independent country and as such doesn't have an own internet connection. It is being administered (or owned, depending on the perspective) by Morocco, which does provide the only internet connection through their national telecom IAM. And yes, Morocco does implement internet censorship sporadically, ironically mostly to block a couple of pro POLISARIO site

      • by nwks (902814)
        According to the map legend black signifies Heavy surveillance. Effective censorship, and splitting hairs I understand. But I live in the USA, so I'm more concerned that my country is not a solid blue. Anyway can we really expect governments, and those private enterprises who's profits depend on placating governments not users to be forthright to the extent of surveillance or out right censorship?
    • by basementman (1475159) on Friday August 07, 2009 @11:45PM (#28993839) Homepage

      I think the reason they don't censor the internet in Russia is because the government knows it would get it's ass handed to them by the good citizens of the internet if they did.

      • In any competetive environment, it's often to the advantage of a sitrong underdog to support open standards at the expense of a strong, closed competitor. Microsoft is all about compatibility in a field when they aren't top dog.

        Russia is in a similar position - they are not a leader in Internet technology, unless you include their legendary mafia, where they excell. Why would they want to regulate when they stand to profit by bilking the wealthy Americans?

        Perhaps even more than in America, the Russians have

        • Microsoft is all about compatibility in a field when they aren't top dog.

          Then why did Microsoft include a lockout chip in its original Xbox in an era when Sony was top dog and Nintendo was #2? A lockout chip reduces the compatibility of a platform with applications developed by students, hobbyists, and small businesses.

    • by moon3 (1530265) on Friday August 07, 2009 @11:52PM (#28993871)
      It has nothing to do with religion. The bigger the country the stakes for government (of any kind) and the involved individuals are higher, the exposure for them is higher, so the urge for control and filtering comes along with it.
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Or just that porno is not acceptable to some cultures.

      • by cpghost (719344)
        Porn is supposed to be more fun when it is forbidden... Why do you think some cultures oppose it so vehemently?
    • by martas (1439879)
      russia doesn't filter the internet, they just assassinate anyone who writes anything that's too troublesome. oh, i'm sorry, i should've said "anyone who writes anything that's too troublesome dies in an accident or under other circumstances completely unrelated to their political stance".

      in soviet russia, only someone with no ability to detect patterns and "coincidences" whatsoever doesn't see the atrocities committed by the government.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by gullevek (174152)

      Erm, Germany is doing this too. Every country will do that. With the reason of Porn, Child Porn or whatever. But at the end it is just to protect the aristocracy, the ruling class, the dictators we always vote for.

      • In Germany this is called "Salamitaktik" (salami attack). Use terrorism (or now child porn) as a litmus test to scare of any opposition. Undo some civil rights. Once the public indignation has dissipated the next hardliner comes forward to implement the next step.

    • Do the governments of countries inhabitated by strongly, religious people tend to filter Internet content?

      AFAIK, Italy has no interest in censoring the Internet and it's certainly inhabited by strongly religious people. The same goes for Israel, I might add.

    • What about Germany and Australia... The only common thread between all these countries is the government wants to control its citizens.

    • by donaldm (919619)

      Together with Iran and Turkey, Malaysia will soon be filtering its Internet content. The common thread among all 3 countries is that the majority of their citizens are Muslims.

      It is not just Muslim countries but so called Christian countries as well. The usual excuses are "We want to protect you from child porn", " We need to protect children and young adults (WTF) from inappropriate material" and the best one "Think of the children". Surprisingly if you investigate the people who propose some sort of censorship they will normally be people who genuinely believe they are doing the right thing.

      Two quotes come to mind when I hear about any type of censorship are "The road to hel

    • we see that Vietnam, China, and North Korea censor the Internet. The common thread among all 3 countries is that the majority of their citizens subscribes to Confucianism.

      I think a more relevant 'thread' among these 3 countries is that they are all communist (just as Russia isn't, referring to your last paragraph.)

      So we have religious nut-job countries censoring, and communists censoring! But Australia is also trying to bring in censorship (neither particularly religious or communist).

      Maybe the "causal relation" is just any government without appropriate checks and balances?

    • by Lakitu (136170)

      Russia doesn't censor what you write, it just censors the people who write. After the fact. With a gun.

      what are you talking about?

      • by cpghost (719344)

        Russia doesn't censor what you write, it just censors the people who write. After the fact. With a gun.

        The real joke went like this (back to Soviet Russia times). A Russian and an American meet at an international conference in Switzerland. The Russian boasts: "In the Soviet Union, we have freedom of expression." The American replies: "In the West, we have freedom after we've expressed ourselves."

        Well... how long we'll enjoy that kind of freedom in the West with increasingly draconian copyright, libel/s

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Answer: Google(R).

    So long as I am the filter, they can filter all they want.

  • by NewbieProgrammerMan (558327) on Friday August 07, 2009 @11:34PM (#28993793)

    Malaysia aims to increase broadband penetration to half of all homes by 2010 as part of its drive to boost economic efficiency.

    Yeah, I'm sure you'll see a lot of economic efficiency coming from the introduction of an "internet" that's so crippled that you can't find any criticism of the government on it.

    • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Friday August 07, 2009 @11:44PM (#28993835) Journal
      As much as I'd like to agree with you, it seems to be working out OK (for the moment at least) for China.

      The world would be a much nicer place if it were true; but there seems to be room, with the right techniques, to capture a fair slice of the benefits(quite possibly not all; but a decent portion) with comparatively little of the freedom.
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        You're kidding right?

        I've got this strange feeling you've never been to china, or know people living there and definitely haven't used their internet. Considering how big it is, how central it is and it's growth, the internet there is terrible. Especially if you go to access a site hosted there from outside the country.

        Although this is a generalization, I've been to China several times (and I'm a nerd so I'm always online), and I've several friends and family that live there. I know "OK" is a relative relat

        • "OK" refers to economic efficiency, not quality of internet access(about which I have no direct experience; but no trouble believing that it sucks). My point was that in spite of considerable censorship of the internet, China seems to be realizing a decent slice of economic advantage.
          • China's economic growth is built directly on unprecedented rape of the environment, and on well-precedented rape of its labour force. Both situations are unsustainable; the latter is just part of the same cycle that led to the cultural revolution last century and similar upheavals as you go backward throughout Chinese history. They never lurch that far forward before consuming all their progress in violence and chaos, and there's no reason to believe the present lurch will be any different.

            The internet is

            • Rape of the labor force led to the Cultural Revolution? WTF dude? The CR was caused by Mao Zedong losing control of the CCP and trying (successfully) to regain control.

              If you actually read any Chinese history, you discover that they regulary destroy themselves. This makes sense when you realize that China is not and has never been an expansionist power. Heck, even Zheng He (that admiral dude before Columbus) only went to see other nations not for colonization, but so that the heathens could be collect

              • Rape of the labor force led to the Cultural Revolution? WTF dude? The CR was caused by Mao Zedong losing control of the CCP and trying (successfully) to regain control.

                Take a step back. The cultural revolution was the culmination of a movement which was able to gather critical mass because the labor force had been so miserably treated under the incumbent feudal regime. I used the word "rape" figuratively of course (though it does apply literally as well).

                • Huh? The 'incumbent feudal regime' was deposed in 1949, decades before the CR. Right-wingers (and suspected right-wingers) were regularly imprisoned and executed. The movement was nothing other than Mao getting back into power using the only lever available to him, the Red Guards (i.e. stupid youth who knew nothing other than what's fed to them...for modern examples see apeish idolation of Eminem, N.W.A., G.W. Bush's religous police who condemned American citizens to Gitmo, Last Poets, Run DMC, etc. The
                  • The cultural revolution was the crowning abuse in a tragic sequence that began with the rise of the communist party. The rise of the communist party is the consequence of the previous social order, an order which is rapidly being recreated today.

                    I don't see the point of continuing this hair-splitting game in which every statement I make is attacked for not including ten paragraphs of context which should be obvious to anyone who has paid the remotest attention to China. Yes, you read some book or whatever

                    • 1. You lost the debate.
                      2. And it's not because of your lack of skills.
                      3. You lost it on the facts.

                      I honestly don't see how. What's the fact that's in question here?

                      Did, as I claimed, the feudal system set the scene for the communist revolution?

                      Did, as I claimed, the communist revolution lead to an escalating series of atrocities, culminating with the most famous and easily identified, the cultural revolution?

                      Is the Chinese economy today, as I claimed, heading back toward the same pattern of sharp divis

                    • FWIW, I think you won, Raju. Your argument was pretty clear, and I think D-a-B was confused or something. S/He seems to think that Mao was somehow the cause of the CR without thinking how Mao was able to get that power in the first place. Sorta like saying a bullet was the cause of a murder, without looking at the person pulling the trigger.

                      The AC spontaneously declaring victory was just... weird. Kinda like Bush stating "Mission Accomplished", when it obviously wasn't.

                      Ok... well... er...

                      Now wh
                    • I guess, let's all let it go?

                      Thanks, sounds good to me!

        • Sites *inside* China are blindingly fast. I went to a lot of trouble to learn specialized Chinese characters (which are rather useless in daily conversation) just to be able to read Chinese bittorrent sites. The government slows down traffic going overseas to make foreign sites less attractive. And don't tell me it's because of infrastructure or distance from the Pacific...BS, Hong Kong and Japan have very well-homed facilities where the only impediment is the speed of light.

          As far as the GP poster's "

          • (i.e., why are we devoting 90% of our effort to fighting Germany when Japan is the one who attacked us?)

            This was because Germany was viewed (and rightly, IMO) as the bigger threat, and the policy was well publicized as "Get Hitler First."

            • Threat to what, exactly? To the continential United States? That the Wehrmacht would somehow come out of nowhere on landing craft and invade New York City? This when they couldn't even get across 22 miles of water to invade England! So the USA was in mortal danger? As if!!!
              • No, Germany was the biggest threat to our allies Britain and Russia. And if you don't think Germany could ever have defeated Britain, consider the Battle of The Atlantic. Don't be more of a fool than you have to.
              • by donaldm (919619)
                I suggest you read some modern history on this. One of the main reasons that Nazi Germany never invaded England was he fact that Germany needed air superiority however they did not know how close they came to achieving it and the burning desire of Hitler to invade Soviet Russia above all else. The possible invasion of America was not even a priority although the German submarines had a field day with coastal US shipping in the early weeks just after the US entered WW2.

                Even the Japanese had no real intenti
    • Yeah, I'm sure you'll see a lot of economic efficiency coming from the introduction of an "internet" that's so crippled that you can't find any criticism of the government on it.

      I'm not sure I see that censoring political criticism will effect Internet commerce... Educate me.

      • by raju1kabir (251972) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @12:29AM (#28993995) Homepage

        Well, in the most obvious way in Malaysia, it prevents people from calling attention to all the problems caused by the corrupt relationship between the government and monopolist Telekom Malaysia. TM provides remarkably bad connectivity at remarkably high prices and manages to maintain iron fist control over the wired last mile for 98% of the population due to a weak regulatory agency (SKMM/MCMC) that spends its time sucking TM's dick instead of doing its job. If people can't shine light on this state of affairs due to political censhorship - and mark my words, that is the single and only purpose of the filtering proposal, porn is a red herring - then there's no hope for change.

        This has already driven away the much-hoped-for internet economy that Cyberjaya was built, at billions of ringgit in taxpayer expense, to host.

        Then there's the simple fact that a filtered internet is a slow and erratic internet. It's true in China and Saudi Arabia and Iran and it will be true here.

        • This has already driven away the much-hoped-for internet economy that Cyberjaya was built, at billions of ringgit in taxpayer expense, to host.

          Gee I remember driving past that place when I was in KL the first time in 2000. Recently I had to research radiotherapy services for my father in law, who is from Ipoh. I noticed that a lot of equipment is made in Malaysia for export, but it rarely gets used there. I am sure the Government wants their people to be nice productive manufacturers, but to not ask too many questions.

          Over the years I have noticed places which should have taken off big time (Palau Langkawi is one which comes to mind) are not gro

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by BitZtream (692029)

          I love how apparently no one can communicate without the Internet.

          You realize people dealt with this soft of problem before the Internet existed right? People actually ... talked to each other ... rather than twiting it up or facebooking.

          Contrary to popular belief, the Internet is not a requirement to life, you can live without it and do pretty much everything you need to do.

          I don't want filtering either, but you're just pushing your own political agenda rather than actually caring about the problem.

          • by raju1kabir (251972) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @05:06AM (#28994891) Homepage

            You realize people dealt with this soft of problem before the Internet existed right? People actually ... talked to each other ... rather than twiting it up or facebooking.

            People can talk to the people they know, and the people in their community, sure. But that is very limiting:

            • No possibility for anonymity
            • Limited number of viewpoints
            • Limited access to externally verifiable information

            The internet has transformed politics in Malaysia, by bringing people all over the country together based on their shared views rather than based solely on whom they happened to live nearby. It's allowed people to have open, frank discussions that previously they would only be able to have with their closest confidants. It's allowed facts and evidence to be brought to general public attention which would previously have been squelched by the BN-owned mass media.

            Of course humans can survive without the internet. But in my mind there is no question that it has enabled a transformative level of communication which we are only beginning to see the full impact of.

          • I'm sure that the folks who didn't want to adopt the automobile over horses, and those who spurned the telephone in favour of older forms of communication espoused similar views.
      • by xaboo (1599655)
        Think in terms of public accounting and freedom of the press. Accounting - If investors have a more transparent view of the companies they want to invest in, they can minimise risk and increase investor confidence. Now, if the news is filtered, how does that effect consumer confidence and commerce? I for one will avoid the untrustworthy. freedom of the press - systems are improved through feedback (critical analysis). The free press can provide this feedback if unhindered by political agendas. Additiona
    • by Wowsers (1151731)

      It's a cunning productivity drive. Without places to moan about the government, you have lots more time for your work, rather than posting to web forums.

  • as a first step towards world domination... and leave a mark on history to tell the rest of the world how someone spend another multi-million tax payer money on a project destined to fail on delivery.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Kiss my ass.

  • by Artifakt (700173) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @12:02AM (#28993901)

    Seems kind of self contradictory - increased penetration and less pornography.

    • by martas (1439879)
      there comes a point when increased penetration turns pornography into smut. i've seen it. it ain't pretty.
    • Every year the government holds a meeting to plan its latest net censorship scheme, then every year the internet industry people leak it out to their big clients who create an uproar and then it gets quietly put away for a while.

      Sooner or later they'll adjust their strategy and sneak it through. Recently we had our first major political censhorship incident when SKMM tried to block heroic gadfly website Malaysia Today [malaysia-today.net], but backed down after a couple weeks when it became clear they could not keep up with th

      • by Viceice (462967)

        I hate to tell you this, but they already have.

        For instance, if you compare Streamyx's DNS and another DNS, say OpenDNS, certain sites are stricken from Streamyx's DNS, which everyone is conveniently told to use.

    • Good. I hope the Internet will always remain free and uncensored, but there are powerful interests out there that wants to censor it to remain in control of the information flow. They are going to say that its for the best interest of the people that the Internet needs to be regulated. That there is no way for regular people to know what information is trustworthy and which is not. Instead, they want to be the ones telling people what information to trust. I hope we never, ever, get there but there is a b
  • Filter content how? Just to their own end nodes or everything that passes through? There is no way to know how a government initiative to do this will be implemented. One would have to assume that if they thought certain content was inappropriate for their own citizens, they wouldn't want anyone else to access it either. When I am in Thailand, and connecting to someone in Indonesia, if my traffic routes through Malaysia, will they filter it?
    • Filter content how? Just to their own end nodes or everything that passes through? There is no way to know how a government initiative to do this will be implemented. One would have to assume that if they thought certain content was inappropriate for their own citizens, they wouldn't want anyone else to access it either. When I am in Thailand, and connecting to someone in Indonesia, if my traffic routes through Malaysia, will they filter it?

      In no case would it affect through traffic (e.g. from Indonesia to

  • flag@whitehouse.gov - why apply blanket censorship when you can selectively harass the important opponents?
  • Could we just stick to submitting stories about countries that DON'T want to censor the internet?

    It would be a lot simpler.

    I'm willing to venture that most of the readers here pretty much assume they all want to anyways...

  • by DNS-and-BIND (461968) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @01:33AM (#28994223) Homepage
    I was on a project with Telekom Malaysia back in '01, went to Kuala Lumpur for a month. Random observations, in no particular order: Telekom is pretty good, other than falling for my company's crappy spiel about our product that barely worked and which could bring an E10000 to its knees with a load of 100 messages per minute. KL was a pretty modern place, with big buildings, good restaurants, shops, etc. The ringgit was set at 4.25 to the dollar (the explanation was that it had protected the Malay economy against George Soros' currency manipulation that helped to cause the Asian Financial Crisis.) This had the odd effect that all the prices were generally what I would expect in America, only 4.25 times less. A plate of [whatever] plus fries and drink at the mall food court would be 5.75, only in local currency, not in dollars (this was back when the USD was actually worth something overseas.) KL was also my first experience with Asian fake markets...hell yeah I came back with a suitcase full of CDs and Kung Fu VCDs (I didn't have a DVD player or DVD drive at the time IIRC.) The bars there sucked, but I suppose that comes with the territory, being an Islamic country and all. I mean, I wouldn't expect the bar scene in Cow's Asshole, Alabama to be thriving, either. There were ads in the newspaper for apartments and jobs, specifically listing the religions, ages, and sexes of the people eligible to apply. Seriously, the ads would say something like "30 sq meters, private bath, window with good view of sunset, unmarried Muslim girls 18-30 only, call 03-77445678." This was quite shocking to me coming from America, with its history of rigidly enforcing civil rights, at gunpoint if necessary [usg.edu]. But Malaysia has rigid enforcement if its religious laws - every citizen's national ID card has a field where it says "religion". A friend of mine related this anecdote: he was in Malaysia to visit the factory, at some restaurant somewhere with the factory people. The factory manager got a tap on her shoulder from the waiter, and she had to go up to the front of the restaurant. She was gone for some time, which caused my buddy to become concerned. She returned in due course, explaining that the JAWI (religious police) came into the restaurant, and she had left her ID card in her car. She had to go all the way out and get it, to prove that she was a Hindu, and therefore not subject to jail for eating during daytime (it was Ramadan at the time of his visit). The JAWI apologized and said that she looked Muslim.

    I'm not surprised a country like this has decided to join China by firewalling the outside world. They have a lot to lose (by their standards) and little to gain (again, by their standards) by allowing unfettered access. And since post-modern thought says that there is no truth, only differing points of view, who can disagree with this decision? No matter how you come down on the censorship debate, there is always another equally valid point of view on the opposite side.

    • by raju1kabir (251972) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @05:18AM (#28994923) Homepage

      The bars there sucked, but I suppose that comes with the territory, being an Islamic country and all. I mean, I wouldn't expect the bar scene in Cow's Asshole, Alabama to be thriving, either.

      FWIW, the bar scene in KL is much better these days.

      JAWI (religious police) came into the restaurant, and she had left her ID card in her car. She had to go all the way out and get it, to prove that she was a Hindu, and therefore not subject to jail for eating during daytime (it was Ramadan

      There was a funny article in the newspaper a few years back where they interviewed (and showed photos of) a bunch of Chinese people who looked sort of Malay-ish, getting them to share their stories of being harassed during Ramadan. Some said they just gave up and ate indoors, others wore giant crucifixes, others turned around and got pre-emptively aggressive with the lunch police.

      • .... and was requested several times to show my ID by the lovely Malaysian religious police while committing the hideous possible crime of eating a burger in McDonalds (I am not joking).

    • by gnapster (1401889)

      And since post-modern thought says that there is no truth, only differing points of view, who can disagree with this decision?

      Anyone who does not accept post-modern thought as sound and infallible.

  • Australia went through an embarrassing run up the filtering road "to protect children"

    Lots of silly examples of inadvertantly (or intentionally, you decide) blocked safe sites
    have already been published, arising from that boondoggle..

    Now, nearby Malyasia wants to follow in AU's dusty trail...?!?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    There are other reasons why the Malaysian governement want to filter Internet traffic. To stop what they might consider to be embarrassing news getting out.

    Here is an excerpt of an e-mail recently sent to me by a Malaysian friend. The word "bumis" mentioned several times in the e-mail refers to Bumiputras - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumiputra - basically Malays, as opposed to other (non-Malay and usually non-Muslim) Malaysians.

    --- excerpt begins ---

    Discrimination of Non-Malays in Malaysia

    Plain racists

    • Other delicious tidbits:

      - Mosques get official funding while Chines temples or other religious buildings get none.

      - The government (Malay dominated of course) counts non Muslims in East Malaysia (check a map) as Bumiputra, which although ethnologicaly may be correct, it is a scam: native people in Borneo are not Muslim, but adding them to the Bumiputra population helps Muslims to claim they are the majority.

      - Although enshrined in Malaysia's constitution, freedom of religion does not exist: http://en.wikipe [wikipedia.org]

  • Fortunately, there are a few that can't have it.

  • not news (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shentino (1139071) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @10:56AM (#28996197)

    Call me out of hibernation once we find a government OPPOSED to internet filtering...

  • "First, they came for the pornogrphers...
    as I was no a pornographer, I didn't speak out..."

    I guess you know the rest...

  • Is porno?

    Umm okie.

  • The Malaysian government insists that such a filter would only be used to block pornography, though critics of the plan expect it would be wielded as a political tool, censoring websites that are critical of the current administration.

    Yes, like they said: pornography.

    When you work without a definition, only knowing it when you see it, you can label anything that way.

    (Yeah, I know the original usage by SCOTUS was for defining obscenity.)

  • did it for Iran so maybe they can get another phat contract there ... maybe siemens and nokia should just move to the middle east if they condone shit like that

Power corrupts. And atomic power corrupts atomically.

Working...