• Profile logout login

#embargoes

Gawker

Share Cancel
   
Upload an image | Add an image URL
×

logging in
  • FAQ. Include # before tag:
  • #tips,
  • #stalker,
  • #opencaption,
  • #internalmemos,
  • etc.

New York, 1:19 PM
Fri Nov 27
11 posts in the last 24 hours

Team

Tip Your Editors:
tips@gawker.com
Tipline: 646-214-8138

Editor-in-Chief:
Gabriel Snyder | Email

West Coast Editor:
Richard Rushfield | Email

Contributing Editors:

Valleywag:
Ryan Tate | Email

Media:
Hamilton Nolan | Email

Politics:
Alex Pareene | Email

Investigations:
John Cook | Email

Entertainment:
Brian Moylan | Email

Nights:
Adrian Chen | Email
Azaria Jagger | Email
Ravi Somaiya | Email

Weekends:
Foster Kamer | Email

Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley | Email

SUBSCRIBE TO Gawker RSS

New: Breaking news and daily top stories via email
4260 Subscribers
Gawker
  • posts about #embargoes more →

    The New, Sensitive Pentagon

    McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders

    'EMBARGOED!'

    WSJ Short On Copy Editors, Too

    First Review Of 'Step Brothers': Less Entertaining Than 'Two and a Half Men'
  • Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.
    Dsmvwl  Admin  Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×
    Image of Mo MoDo Mo MoDo
    08/08/09

    In reply to The New, Sensitive Pentagon
    I also spend Hiroshima Day drinking kamikazees until I'm bombed.
    **rimshot**
     Reply
    Mo MoDo was starred Mo MoDo was unstarred
    Image of naugahydeinplainsight naugahydeinplainsight
    08/08/09

    @Mo MoDo: Just so long as you have Enola Gay old time.
     Reply
    naugahydeinplainsight was starred naugahydeinplainsight was unstarred
    Image of naugahydeinplainsight naugahydeinplainsight
    08/07/09

    In reply to The New, Sensitive Pentagon
    Seriously? Of all the things the Pentagon and the Obama administration are doing, I'm having trouble getting worked up over embargoing this story for a day and a half -- which coincides with when the consolidation begins. If they had released it for Thursday they would have been slammed as, yes, insensitive. I guess they should have waited and held the briefing today. But even if you don't buy the military's claim that "We're just trying to be sensitive to that [Hiroshima]" this seems more like time management, for the press and the Pentagon, than a question of transparency.
     Reply
    Edited by naugahydeinplainsight at 08/07/09 6:11 PM naugahydeinplainsight was starred naugahydeinplainsight was unstarred
    Image of Stream Of Consciousness Stream Of Consciousness
    08/07/09

    @naugahydeinplainsight: Agreed. I think you summed it up pretty well here.
     Reply
    naugahydeinplainsight promoted this comment Stream Of Consciousness was starred Stream Of Consciousness was unstarred
    Image of belltolls belltolls
    08/07/09

    In reply to The New, Sensitive Pentagon
    I think they were afraid it would sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids.
     Reply
    belltolls was starred belltolls was unstarred
    Image of Stream Of Consciousness Stream Of Consciousness
    08/07/09

    In reply to The New, Sensitive Pentagon
    How about we eliminate our nuclear arsenal entirely? We are the biggest hypocrites when it comes to nuclear proliferation.
     Reply
    naugahydeinplainsight promoted this comment Stream Of Consciousness was starred Stream Of Consciousness was unstarred
    Image of Bitrex Bitrex
    08/07/09

    @Stream Of Consciousness: During the 19th and 20th centuries, the number of deaths due to conflict grew at a geometric rate, until World War 2 where 50 million people were killed in the span of about 5 years. After World War 2 (and the concurrent development of nuclear weapons) the number of deaths due to conflict leveled off at about 1 million per year. There is a strong argument that the deterrent power of nuclear weapons prevents the occurrence of the kind of massive, prolonged conflicts such as World Wars 1 and 2 in which millions of people are thrown into the grinder. The cost of the deterrence is, of course, a small yet not insignificant chance per year of a nuclear conflict with the levels of death and conceivable destruction of civilization/global environment that use of large numbers of nuclear weapons entails. So is the risk worth the reward?
     Reply
    naugahydeinplainsight promoted this comment Bitrex was starred Bitrex was unstarred
    Image of Stream Of Consciousness Stream Of Consciousness
    08/07/09

    @Bitrex: There is no doubt in my mind that it can act as quite a heavy deterrent. However, it is still extremely hypocritical to tell other nations whether or not they are allowed to have nuclear weapons. Considering that we are the only nation to ever use these horrible weapons on another population, I'd say we are most definitely hypocrites.
    And it is debatable whether or not the Japanese would have surrendered even if we had not dropped 2 bombs. But, you do bring up a valid point.
    If only Oppenheimer and the other scientists involved had known what they were creating and how it would have been used at the time.
     Reply
    Edited by Stream Of Consciousness at 08/07/09 6:09 PM Stream Of Consciousness was starred Stream Of Consciousness was unstarred
    Image of Bitrex Bitrex
    08/07/09

    @Stream Of Consciousness: Is it hypocritical that we attempt to dictate the nuclear policy of nations such as North Korea and Iran when we posses a massive arsenal ourselves? Yes. Is it unfair? Yes. Should either of those facts enter into the equation when determining nuclear policy? No. Nuclear policy is the epitome of realpolitik - the non-nuclear states want nuclear weapons, and the nuclear states want to make sure they don't get them. The people who make nuclear policy couldn't give a fuck what NK or Iran view as fair or unfair, just so long as they aren't able to amass their own nuclear arsenals. As far as the nuclear issue is concerned, they can either choose to get with the program or suffer the consequences.
     Reply
    Bitrex was starred Bitrex was unstarred
    Image of OrenDuckers OrenDuckers
    08/07/09

    In reply to The New, Sensitive Pentagon
    Is it just me or does John Cook just spend all day complaining about one thing or another?
     Reply
    naugahydeinplainsight approved this comment OrenDuckers was starred OrenDuckers was unstarred
    Image of Pope John Peeps II Pope John Peeps II
    08/07/09

    @OrenDuckers: So I take it you've never actually read any gawker media sites before?
     Reply
    Pope John Peeps II was starred Pope John Peeps II was unstarred
    Image of Stream Of Consciousness Stream Of Consciousness
    08/07/09

    @Pope John Peeps II: lol
     Reply
    naugahydeinplainsight promoted this comment Stream Of Consciousness was starred Stream Of Consciousness was unstarred
    Image of DahlELama DahlELama
    08/07/09

    @OrenDuckers: At least he gets paid for it; the rest of us have no excuse.
     Reply
    DahlELama was starred DahlELama was unstarred
    Image of John Cook John Cook
    08/08/09

    @OrenDuckers: Dad, is that you?
     Reply
    John Cook was starred John Cook was unstarred
    Image of Valerie Flame Valerie Flame
    08/06/09

    In reply to McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders
    The most telling part? "I'm on night cops rotation all this week since we no longer can afford night cops reporters."
     Reply
    Valerie Flame was starred Valerie Flame was unstarred
    Image of valet_of_the_dolls valet_of_the_dolls
    08/05/09

    In reply to McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders
    Jack Shafer has the look of the professionally aggrieved.
     Reply
    valet_of_the_dolls was starred valet_of_the_dolls was unstarred
    Image of onebadclam onebadclam
    08/05/09

    In reply to McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders
    "cheft puffing"
    Good to see the Elizabethan "S" making a comeback.
     Reply
    onebadclam was starred onebadclam was unstarred
    Image of Seeräuber Jenny Seeräuber Jenny
    08/05/09

    In reply to McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders
    Jack Shafer:
    Please remember your own words the next time you make fun of someone and tell people who protest to lighten up.
     Reply
    Seeräuber Jenny was starred Seeräuber Jenny was unstarred
    Image of SidAndFinancy SidAndFinancy
    08/05/09

    In reply to McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders
    Why did the chicken cross the road?
    To get to the other side!
    You got a problem with that?
     Reply
    SidAndFinancy was starred SidAndFinancy was unstarred
    Image of DennyCrane DennyCrane
    08/05/09

    In reply to McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders
    RE: Shafer: That may seriously be the dumbest thing I have ever heard in my entire life. My head is spinning.
     Reply
    DennyCrane was starred DennyCrane was unstarred
    Image of RandomLunatic RandomLunatic
    08/05/09

    @DennyCrane: I like his column, but you're right. That was pure idiocy. He might as well have said, 'really, the problem is I'm a humorless dick.'
     Reply
    econdave promoted this comment RandomLunatic was starred RandomLunatic was unstarred
    Image of lobstr lobstr
    08/05/09

    In reply to McClatchy DC Editor Accidentally Forwards All These Emails About Blackwater Murders
    This wouldn't be the first time a McClatchy person had such an epic "send-to-all" fuckup: this one's classic:
    [cancelthebee.blogspot.com]
     Reply
    lobstr was starred lobstr was unstarred
    Image of umbriago umbriago
    08/05/09

    please. "mcclatchy watch" is full of shit. it's probably made up.
     Reply
    Valerie Flame promoted this comment umbriago was starred umbriago was unstarred
    Image of Valerie Flame Valerie Flame
    08/06/09

    @umbriago: actually, no, a lot of people within the company read, pay attention and leak to it.
     Reply
    Valerie Flame was starred Valerie Flame was unstarred
    Image of raincoaster raincoaster
    07/22/09

    In reply to 'EMBARGOED!'
    "Embargoed" is visible. What got edited out was "and then forgotten in the bottom of the pile for 48 hours too long".
     Reply
    raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred
    Image of daveyjonesisdead daveyjonesisdead
    07/22/09

    In reply to 'EMBARGOED!'
    Hold it - that was in FT's print edition today. why embargo it?
     Reply
    daveyjonesisdead was starred daveyjonesisdead was unstarred
    Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Login

Enter your username and password.

Please enter a username.
Please enter your password.
logging in
Login via Facebook | Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Reset Password

Please enter your email address to have your password reset.

Please enter your email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
requesting password reset

Register

Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.

Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.

Please enter a username.
Please enter a password.
Please confirm your password.
Passwords are not identical.
Please enter a valid email address.
registration sent, waiting for reply

Submit Your Comment

You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.

See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.

Please enter a valid email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
logging in

Login with your Facebook or Gawker account.

Sign up here.



  • Archives
  • About
  • Advertising
  • Legal
  • Help
  • Report a Bug
  • FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.