this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
152 points (93.7% liked)

World News

38530 readers
1536 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The U.K. paper confirmed it had removed the letter because of its sudden surge in popularity on TikTok and other social media sites.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world 58 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Goddamn weirdo cowards. There's no reason to remove cut & dry, factual information. It's not like they posted the letter & had annotations, "We love this guy!! Yay!! Hooray, 9/11!" They were like this is from Osama, to America, here it is. There's nothing for them to be ashamed of; it's stupid that they are.

[–] Cannacheques@slrpnk.net 2 points 10 months ago

Meh, I would bet that the average Muslim or American person would probably not be too bothered

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago (2 children)

ALink to the letter if you want to read it.

[–] Ddhuud@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I don't know if it's an ad blocker thing, but the link takes you to a page with the title and no content.

[–] Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It reads like a typical American baptist priest. Sprinkled with far right jew hating ideology "da jooos control this and that." But I understand his grievances and why he blames the American people for government decisions.

I mean this could be a long boomer rant on Facebook but replace america with China.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lnxtx@feddit.nl 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)
[–] samokosik@lemmynsfw.com 17 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Despite the fact that bin Laden is a stupid terrorist that should be removed, I don't believe in any form of censorship and don't see why it cannot be published.

Though some people can be stupid enough to start supporting terrorism afterwards...

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Though some people can be stupid enough to start supporting terrorism afterwards…

I used to think the same thing. Then my company got United Healthcare Insurance. Now I'm questioning. Would I have been angry if Osama had attacked their board of directors? I'm not so sure.

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Evil conveniently never harms other evil things.

I swear not a single (primary) country leader died during covid. Even fat kim jong-un somehow made it out alive. Granted it wasn't a particularly lethal virus, but man it would have been satisfying to see some dictators kick the bucket.

[–] JimboDHimbo@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago

A virus cannot be evil, a virus is just a virus. But, I get your sentiment.

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

How many primary country leaders are there?

Here's a list of notable people, mostly politicians, that died of covid. It's quite long.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deaths_due_to_COVID-19

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Discoslugs@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't believe in any form of censorship

You don't believe CSAM should be reported and removed from websites?

Cuz thats censorship as well.

[–] samokosik@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What I meant is censorship in terms of opinions on topics. We should be presented with both sides imo

I should have written it in a clearer manner

[–] 0xD@infosec.pub 2 points 10 months ago

There is no "both sides", there is an infinite amount of opinions and perspectives on one thing: reality. Not all of those opinions are worth engaging with or deserve a platform.

Though in this case with the letter it's historically significant and I find their reasoning kind of pathetic, so I agree with you here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] djquadratic@kbin.social 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This reminds me of those hitler quotes that people were duped into agreeing with and then being told it was said by hitler.

[–] Nihilistra@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Maybe you are interested in a little game.

Kanye... or Hitler?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0RMdwA8GWB8&pp=ygUMaGl0bGVyIGthbnll

[–] guyrocket@kbin.social 8 points 10 months ago

This reminds me of something I did around the time of 9/11.

I had read an interview with Bin Laden on the CNN website and could not find it there the next day. Whoever or however it happens, I'm pretty sure our government censored anything that might be remotely sympathetic to the "bad guys".

I'm glad this is more obvious now with everything being on the www. But this shows that the censorship has not stopped.

[–] interceder270@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Why does the media censor anything that's critical of Israel?

[–] Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Wrong one, that's his compound letter

https://perma.cc/PLE8-E8T6

[–] steven@infosec.pub 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Why doesn't Wikipedia have it?

[–] Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] steven@infosec.pub 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah I went to check and Wikipedia is linking the wayback machine's version of the guardian article. Fair enough.

load more comments
view more: next ›