If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Two US embassies attacked and the craven diplomatic response to it would seem to be the sort of thing that warrants New York Times front-page coverage, yes? Not if it crowds out a Romney hit-piece it's not   (nytimes.com) divider line 399
    More: Obvious, United States, CTU, embassy, Benjamin Netanyahu, warrants, State Senator Roy J. McDonald, military strike  
•       •       •

4133 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Sep 2012 at 10:19 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



399 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-12 08:47:04 AM
NY Times headline for Armageddon: "WORLD ENDS: Women, Minorities Hardest Hit"
 
2012-09-12 08:55:53 AM
the craven diplomatic response to it

I'm confused about what this is supposed to mean. The only official response I've seen has been condemnation.
 
2012-09-12 08:58:44 AM

skinnycatullus: the craven diplomatic response to it

I'm confused about what this is supposed to mean. The only official response I've seen has been condemnation.


No, you see, the right thing to do would be to start bombing before even releasing a statement. Otherwise you're just encouraging the savages to attack us further.
 
2012-09-12 09:11:51 AM

skinnycatullus: The only official response I've seen has been condemnation.


With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

Chris Hitchens is spinning in his grave.
 
2012-09-12 09:20:46 AM
i love how the romneybots have already come out and said that obama's response is "craven" when in fact he condemned it harshly. way to turn the death of an american patriot into a political point, you scumbags.

btw - what time did the incident occur, and what time does the NYT go to print? that might account for the lack of headline in the PRINT edition. i see that the online edition is leading with the killing.
 
2012-09-12 09:25:51 AM

FlashHarry: i love how the romneybots have already come out and said that obama's response is "craven"


Headline distinctly says "diplomatic" response.

The White House is disavowing the embassy's Weenerss, but shiat...in the diplomatic world people agonize over the wording of statements. If the White House doesn't like what the embassy said, then clearly they and Cairo are not on the same page.
 
2012-09-12 09:26:24 AM
POTUS to speak at 10:35 EDT.
 
2012-09-12 09:27:25 AM

Gulper Eel: The White House is disavowing the embassy's Weenerss


Geez, is Bill Swerski handling the filterpwnage these days?
 
2012-09-12 09:28:31 AM
i.imgur.com

This is the only slightly relevant piece on the front-page that I see.
 
2012-09-12 09:30:57 AM
i.imgur.com 

The Front Page of the NYT in Submitter's link. I see nothing anywhere about it.
 
2012-09-12 09:32:07 AM

Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.


That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.
 
2012-09-12 09:33:12 AM

Gulper Eel: Gulper Eel: The White House is disavowing the embassy's Weenerss

Geez, is Bill Swerski handling the filterpwnage these days?



That was great!
 
2012-09-12 09:38:18 AM
Two US embassies attacked and the craven diplomatic response to it would seem to be the sort of thing that warrants New York Times front-page coverage, yes?

Negative NYT Press for Democrats? Subby must have been born yesterday.
 
2012-09-12 09:39:10 AM

Gulper Eel: The White House is disavowing the embassy's Weenerss, but shiat...in the diplomatic world people agonize over the wording of statements. If the White House doesn't like what the embassy said, then clearly they and Cairo are not on the same page.


Which is not surprising. In the heat of rapidly changing cultural conditions and self-preservation, there are likely to be miscommunications between an Administration and its embassies. And Romney is just being a dick. In 2008 Obama closed ranks with Bush when issues came up--saying "we have one president and one administration at a time." Romney doesn't even have the principles to do that.
 
2012-09-12 09:40:03 AM
Holy shiate, the two embassy attacks didn't even make the NY Times front page? Even MSNBC is blushing at that.
 
2012-09-12 09:40:51 AM

skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.


HAH! Like such a trivial matter as the actual timing and release of a statement would matter to Romney's manure-spreader.
 
2012-09-12 09:41:41 AM

skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.


The embassy response was before the riot?  It was just about the film outrage?  That gives it some perspective.  Still a stupid apology for a private citizens YouTube video.  But not a response to the riots right or wrong. Are you sure?
 
2012-09-12 09:43:46 AM
oh wait, yeah, i see the little teaser in the bottom left corner.
 
2012-09-12 09:44:29 AM

I_C_Weener: The embassy response was before the riot? It was just about the film outrage? That gives it some perspective. Still a stupid apology for a private citizens YouTube video. But not a response to the riots right or wrong. Are you sure?


According to them:
2012.talkingpointsmemo.com
 
2012-09-12 09:52:01 AM

I_C_Weener: skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.

The embassy response was before the riot?  It was just about the film outrage?  That gives it some perspective.  Still a stupid apology for a private citizens YouTube video.  But not a response to the riots right or wrong. Are you sure?


This shows the timing...

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/12/mitt%E2%80%99s_shameful_libya_stateme n t/
 
2012-09-12 09:53:20 AM
NYT's story on the Bengazi attack in on the US consulate in Libya?

Link

I found it in the "most viewed" part.

The Cairo flag burning/wall scaling incident?

Link

And before the ink on those are even dry Romney's campaign is already making this "bad news... for Obama".

Romney actually called Obama's reaction "disgraceful".

In response... Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said the campaign was "shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Gov. Romney would choose to launch a political attack."
 
2012-09-12 10:03:12 AM
Tehran 1979, Beirut 1982

Cairo and Benghazi 2012.
 
2012-09-12 10:15:59 AM

Gulper Eel: Gulper Eel: The White House is disavowing the embassy's Weenerss

Geez, is Bill Swerski handling the filterpwnage these days?


So after you'd bumped your rather foolish article to commented you were just so excited you had to keep coming back.

What does this stuff do for you?
 
2012-09-12 10:17:31 AM

I_C_Weener: skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.

The embassy response was before the riot?  It was just about the film outrage?  That gives it some perspective.  Still a stupid apology for a private citizens YouTube video.  But not a response to the riots right or wrong. Are you sure?


So, angry villagers are shopping for pitchforks to attack you for something someone else did, and you think it's stupid to try to diffuse the situation by saying "hey, it wasn't me"?
 
2012-09-12 10:22:05 AM
Stay classy NYT.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-12 10:22:17 AM

skinnycatullus: the craven diplomatic response to it

I'm confused about what this is supposed to mean. The only official response I've seen has been condemnation.


We are supposed to immediately launch an invasion of Egypt and Libya to show how macho we are.
 
2012-09-12 10:24:03 AM
fark you farking muslim extremists, and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Muhammad.
 
2012-09-12 10:24:26 AM

vernonFL: Tehran 1979, Beirut 1982

Cairo and Benghazi 2012.


PC Beach 1987. I stormed the embassy of many a Panhandle girl in my Monte SS... if you know what I mean.
 
2012-09-12 10:24:49 AM

vernonFL: Tehran 1979, Beirut 1982

Cairo and Benghazi 2012.


farm4.static.flickr.com
 
2012-09-12 10:26:07 AM
The rubble that we'll be sifting through for months?

The lies and misdirection from every conceivable angle on this story.

Jews, Muslims, Dems, GOP, NYT, WSJ, Rinsed Pubis, Deb Wass-Schultz - this is going to be a layer cake of shiat the likes of which we haven't seen since 9/11 (praise be thy name, Never Forget, USA USA, Toby Keith is God, etc).
 
2012-09-12 10:26:23 AM
Am I missing something?

"U.S Envoy to Libya Is Killed in Attack" is the top story on the front page.

NY Times front page
 
2012-09-12 10:26:24 AM

propasaurus: I_C_Weener: skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.

The embassy response was before the riot?  It was just about the film outrage?  That gives it some perspective.  Still a stupid apology for a private citizens YouTube video.  But not a response to the riots right or wrong. Are you sure?

So, angry villagers are shopping for pitchforks to attack you for something someone else did, and you think it's stupid to try to diffuse the situation by saying "hey, it wasn't me"?


img43.imageshack.us
 
2012-09-12 10:26:40 AM

vpb: skinnycatullus: the craven diplomatic response to it

I'm confused about what this is supposed to mean. The only official response I've seen has been condemnation.

We are supposed to immediately launch an invasion of Egypt and Libya to show how macho we are.


Better yet, lets bomb Iran!
 
2012-09-12 10:26:48 AM

Somacandra: In the heat of rapidly changing cultural conditions


Rapidly changing? Looks like their culture's still stuck somewhere around 800 AD.
 
2012-09-12 10:27:00 AM

Somacandra: [i.imgur.com image 348x640] 

The Front Page of the NYT in Submitter's link. I see nothing anywhere about it.


Dear dumbass and tardmitter and all butthurt knuckledraggers, you do realize that papers are printed on a deadline, don't you? And said events may have occured after said deadline. And that even Obama and his magical time machine can't go back and change a paper once it's printed. You do realize these things, don't you?????
 
2012-09-12 10:27:06 AM
CRY MOARmon
 
2012-09-12 10:27:11 AM
Jesus Fark is getting bad.
 
2012-09-12 10:27:23 AM

Kazan: fark you farking muslim extremists, and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Muhammad.


This could be Mad Fark Libs.

fark you farking Mormon extremists and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Joseph Smith.
 
2012-09-12 10:27:35 AM

skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.


Romney would have retroactively condemned the attacks before they happened.
 
2012-09-12 10:28:22 AM
Oh, Subby linked to the stories in the print edition of the 9/12 NYT, not the online edition. Sneaky but effective.
 
2012-09-12 10:28:34 AM

vernonFL: Cairo and Benghazi


Cairo and Benghazi, when the walls fell.

Cairo and Benghazi, their flags ashes.
 
2012-09-12 10:28:40 AM

Kazan: fark you farking muslim extremists, and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Muhammad.


I wonder if you'll feel the same about voting for a Mormon?
 
2012-09-12 10:29:01 AM

Moopy Mac: Am I missing something?

"U.S Envoy to Libya Is Killed in Attack" is the top story on the front page.


That's the constantly-updating website front page.

TFA is about the print front page. And yeah, lots of people still buy the Times that way.
 
2012-09-12 10:29:30 AM

xtragrind: Stay classy NYT.


Define that word for me.
 
2012-09-12 10:29:48 AM

Somacandra: [i.imgur.com image 348x640] 

The Front Page of the NYT in Submitter's link. I see nothing anywhere about it.


Because for some crazy reason the NT Times uses the URL www.nytimes.com for their online content. Weird!
 
2012-09-12 10:29:52 AM

Moopy Mac: Am I missing something?

"U.S Envoy to Libya Is Killed in Attack" is the top story on the front page.

NY Times front page


You're missing an opportunity to crank your fauxrage to 11ty.
 
2012-09-12 10:30:03 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.

Romney would have retroactively condemned the attacks before they happened.


Yeah, I was wondering about the timestamp of that statement. If the media gets a second cup of coffee today, they might question Romney about his press release.

Andrea Saul looks like a f*cking Busch league amateur out there.
 
2012-09-12 10:30:26 AM

Gulper Eel: Moopy Mac: Am I missing something?

"U.S Envoy to Libya Is Killed in Attack" is the top story on the front page.

That's the constantly-updating website front page.

TFA is about the print front page. And yeah, lots of people still buy the Times that way.


So what was Subby's point?
 
2012-09-12 10:30:32 AM

coeyagi: Kazan: fark you farking muslim extremists, and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Muhammad.

This could be Mad Fark Libs.

fark you farking Mormon extremists and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Joseph Smith.


Hmmmm.....that still works.
 
2012-09-12 10:30:53 AM

Moopy Mac: Am I missing something?

"U.S Envoy to Libya Is Killed in Attack" is the top story on the front page.

NY Times front page


Tardmitter is using the printed front page, which was printed before the events happened.

Time/space continuum, how does it work?
 
Displayed 50 of 399 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report