Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Gawker)   The 'secret' Saudi drone base revealed by the New York Times and Washington Post yesterday was actually reported months ago... by Fox News. Bonus: Both the NYT and WaPo knew about it at the same time as Fox   (gawker.com) divider line 32
    More: Followup, NYT, Washington Post, Fox News, Saudis, Arabian Peninsula, Anwar al-Awlaki  
•       •       •

1249 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Feb 2013 at 9:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-02-07 07:30:59 AM  
Yep, also AlJazeera reported the deaths at the Algerian hostage site *days* before the American news media did.  War is Peace Citizen, kiss your ass goddbye.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-02-07 09:08:20 AM  
I liked this part: It seems that all mention of Saudi Arabi was scrubbed from the FoxNews.com story sometime after publication and replaced with the less-specific "Arabian Peninsula," though the original still viewable on the mobile version.
 
2013-02-07 09:31:30 AM  
It's only an outrage if a "liberal" paper reports it.
 
2013-02-07 09:33:18 AM  
Gawker!?  Like I'm going to believe a bunch of elitist New York libs.  Sorry, fartlibs, but I won't believe this until I hear from the doughty piehole of Jonah Goldberg.
 
2013-02-07 09:33:24 AM  
Yeah, but it's Fox, so it's prudent to get a bit more verification before going all "ZOMG!" about it.

/DNRTFA.  I mean, it's Gawker.  Same rules for them.
 
2013-02-07 09:34:17 AM  

lilbjorn: It's only an outrage if a "liberal" paper reports it.


To be fair, are we supposed to start taking Fox's journalistic integrity for granted now?  They're great at ideology, but they kinda suck at facts.
 
2013-02-07 09:34:47 AM  
So, we're supposed to be surprised that news agencies aren't doing their fact-checking before publishing a story with a sensational, attention-whoring headline?
 
2013-02-07 09:36:46 AM  

Mercutio74: To be fair, are we supposed to start taking Fox's journalistic integrity for granted now? They're great at ideology, but they kinda suck at facts.


True, WaPo should have led off their article with "Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut: FoxNews' report on secret base from 2012 turns out to be true."
 
2013-02-07 09:37:14 AM  
Is Droneghazi a scandal yet?
 
2013-02-07 09:39:39 AM  
Nixon's secret war in Laos and Cambodia really redefined the word. Now it means stuff everyone knows but nobody wants to talk about.
 
2013-02-07 09:56:08 AM  
Did Geraldo draw a map in the sand on how to attack it?
 
2013-02-07 09:56:10 AM  
What's with this obsession over 'drones' lately?  I mean, I get the arguments for/against them, it just seems like lately there's been a surge of "OMG DRONES" in the media and elsewhere.
 
2013-02-07 09:58:11 AM  
So the Times cooperated when the CIA asked them not to run the story, but Fox did run it.

The reason this is hilarious is that if it had gone the other way, Fox would be accusing the Times of being disloyal anti-American pinkos who are aiding our enemies, and they'd do it all day long for weeks.
 
2013-02-07 10:01:11 AM  
If what you reported before checking the facts turns out to be true, it's completely justified.
 
2013-02-07 10:10:33 AM  
Frankly, regardless of who reported it first, it is entirely believable and no one gives a damn.  Yes, we use drones.  We use them to violate the sovereignty of nations.  We use it to assassinate people on a list personally approved by the President.  So, the fact that we have a base in one country v. another is hardly news anymore.
 
2013-02-07 10:10:34 AM  

ZAZ: I liked this part: It seems that all mention of Saudi Arabi was scrubbed from the FoxNews.com story sometime after publication and replaced with the less-specific "Arabian Peninsula," though the original still viewable on the mobile version.


Because they are owned in part by a Saudi Prince.
 
2013-02-07 10:12:30 AM  
I posted a link on FB about the leaked assasination/drone memo and a friend of a friend challenged me on it saying she couldn't find it on "any reputable site", implying it was BS .

i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-07 10:22:20 AM  
I'm failing to see the relevance here. Or the outrage.
 
2013-02-07 10:23:31 AM  

Wooly Bully: if it had gone the other way, Fox would be accusing the Times of being disloyal anti-American pinkos who are aiding our enemies, and they'd do it all day long for weeks.


Only if a Republican was President. Since a Democrat is President, they would instead ignore that the NY Times did publish it and accuse the liberal media of burying the story.
 
2013-02-07 10:27:38 AM  

wambu: I posted a link on FB about the leaked assasination/drone memo and a friend of a friend challenged me on it saying she couldn't find it on "any reputable site", implying it was BS .

[i.imgur.com image 414x521]


No offense, but anyone that posts a pic with the phrase "Schooled Libtards" in it probably isn't likely to "school" people often.
 
2013-02-07 10:32:46 AM  

fritton: wambu: I posted a link on FB about the leaked assasination/drone memo and a friend of a friend challenged me on it saying she couldn't find it on "any reputable site", implying it was BS .

[i.imgur.com image 414x521]

No offense, but anyone that posts a pic with the phrase "Schooled Libtards" in it probably isn't likely to "school" people often.


he doesn't have too. like he said.
 
2013-02-07 11:02:16 AM  

thurstonxhowell: Wooly Bully: if it had gone the other way, Fox would be accusing the Times of being disloyal anti-American pinkos who are aiding our enemies, and they'd do it all day long for weeks.

Only if a Republican was President. Since a Democrat is President, they would instead ignore that the NY Times did publish it and accuse the liberal media of burying the story.


Man, you got their MO nailed.
 
2013-02-07 11:07:58 AM  
Fox News also reported on FEMA concentration camps being built in the Midwest.
 
2013-02-07 11:48:03 AM  

Mentat: Fox News also reported on FEMA concentration camps being built in the Midwest.


You mean when they reported that they weren't there?  Link:  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513024,00.html
 
2013-02-07 12:46:30 PM  

I_C_Weener: Frankly, regardless of who reported it first, it is entirely believable and no one gives a damn.  Yes, we use drones.  We use them to violate the sovereignty of nations.


What nations would that be?  I'm under the impression that the governments of these nations have agreed to allow this. Pakistan makes a fuss, but they haven't demanded a complete stop (and we all know they only kick up a fuss as a way of pushing for more bribes/aid dollars).  Yemen and our puppet regime in Afghanistan have certainly agreed to them.

Its not like we're using them against North Korea or Iran - you know, actual enemies that pose an actual threat.
 
2013-02-07 01:07:18 PM  

fritton: wambu: I posted a link on FB about the leaked assasination/drone memo and a friend of a friend challenged me on it saying she couldn't find it on "any reputable site", implying it was BS .

[i.imgur.com image 414x521]

No offense, but anyone that posts a pic with the phrase "Schooled Libtards" in it probably isn't likely to "school" people often.


No offense, you are referring to a website that people use the word "Derp" to define anything they object to.
 
2013-02-07 02:12:44 PM  

Frozboz: What's with this obsession over 'drones' lately?  I mean, I get the arguments for/against them, it just seems like lately there's been a surge of "OMG DRONES" in the media and elsewhere.


Apparently, someone just realized that a piece of technology that we've had for at least ten years, been using to kill people for that entire time, have been deployed in not-so-secret bases (i.e. wherever American troops are stationed), and that kill people in a way that some find objectionable is newsworthy.

Why this is, is anyone's guess. I suppose that periodically the fact that the US government kills people becomes too much for ordinary people to bear, and they object to it.
 
2013-02-07 02:36:54 PM  
The Saudis are our secret pals. That's why they get to chop the heads off a few slaves now and then.
 
2013-02-07 02:40:49 PM  
 
2013-02-07 02:45:30 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Apparently, someone just realized that a piece of technology that we've had for at least ten years, been using to kill people for that entire time, have been deployed in not-so-secret bases (i.e. wherever American troops are stationed), and that kill people in a way that some find objectionable is newsworthy.


It might have something to do with the fact that John Brennan's confirmation hearing for director of the CIA is today.
 
2013-02-07 03:42:53 PM  
So we're saying that the NYT and the Post were being cautious in publishing what was potentially very sensitive military intelligence, but that the patriots at Fox had to immediately go and shoot their mouths off? Is that it?
 
2013-02-09 06:24:19 PM  
mksmith: "So we're saying that the NYT and the Post were being cautious in publishing what was potentially very sensitive military intelligence, but that the patriots at Fox had to immediately go and shoot their mouths off? Is that it?"


Hmm. What's your opinion on Wikileaks?
 
Displayed 32 of 32 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report