Isn't it ironic? They block the page to a specific group of people based on "5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups".
They also potentially cut off the access for people who have their main project site at sf.net - which leaves everyone using the software without updates from a trusted/original source in case of security issues.
Not really because a software license agreement can't supersede the laws of the country in which it is executed. Also the license only stipulates that you make the source available to people you distribute the compiled binary to so if they block the whole site it's hard to argue they are breaking the letter of the agreement.
aha what about clinton's Internet freedom speech? US secretary of State Hillary Clinton few days urged Internet freedom! as she said:
“We stand for a single Internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas,” said Clinton in a major address that cited China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt among countries that censored the Internet or harassed bloggers!
Well, maybe that speech was the first step toward a proposal to change the law. That's hypocritical of Clinton to say that, I agree. That is besides the point though, here we are talking about the actions of SF as they relate to the law and the GPL, not the actions of the American government.