Author Topic: Interesting Articles... (Read 2443366 times)

Moes Tavern · « **Reply #2720 on:** October 14, 2014, 10:35:17 PM »

Ergel · « **Reply #2721 on:** October 14, 2014, 10:42:00 PM »

I'm confused. What was interesting about the article?

sky121 · « **Reply #2722 on:** October 14, 2014, 10:43:00 PM »

The symbols on the oreo and why they're there.

Ergel · « **Reply #2723 on:** October 14, 2014, 10:45:31 PM »

There is nothing conclusive, no evidence- just guesses. I could make something up as well. Would that be interesting?

TimT · « **Reply #2724 on:** October 14, 2014, 10:46:23 PM »

There is nothing conclusive, no evidence- just guesses. I could make something up as well. Would that be interesting?

Go for it, I'm all ears.

sky121 · « **Reply #2725 on:** October 14, 2014, 10:46:52 PM »

There is nothing conclusive, just guesses. I could make something up as well. Would that be interesting?

Perhaps.

asd · « **Reply #2726 on:** October 15, 2014, 01:17:26 AM »

coralsnake · « **Reply #2727 on:** October 15, 2014, 10:39:03 AM »

coralsnake · « **Reply #2728 on:** October 15, 2014, 10:46:12 AM »

There is nothing conclusive, no evidence- just guesses. I could make something up as well. Would that be interesting?

+1

The whole article is "The Atlantic reasons",
"The design’s inventor may have been".

Hardly anything definitive.

coralsnake · « **Reply #2729 on:** October 15, 2014, 10:48:26 AM »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-the-magic-of-sukkot/2014/10/14/1a2a9614-53c8-11e4-ba4b-f6333e2c0453_story.html

Didnt know Amazon sold lulavim.

But it seems they do:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/s/ref=is_box_?k=lulav

churnbabychurn · « **Reply #2730 on:** October 15, 2014, 12:45:49 PM »

Didnt know Amazon sold lulavim.

But it seems they do:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/s/ref=is_box_?k=lulav

nice! What's the return policy?

Emkay · « **Reply #2731 on:** October 16, 2014, 05:55:53 PM »

Drago · « **Reply #2732 on:** October 18, 2014, 02:38:18 PM »

Emkay · « **Reply #2733 on:** October 18, 2014, 04:52:36 PM »

Beggars in Lakewood???

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/magazine/the-beggars-of-lakewood.html?_r=0

Comments are as expected

asd · « **Reply #2734 on:** October 18, 2014, 08:45:29 PM »

Why in the world would they cooperate with the NY times on a article like this the title of the article alone spins the whole story negatively.

churnbabychurn · « **Reply #2735 on:** October 18, 2014, 09:00:48 PM »

Why in the world would they cooperate with the NY times on a article like this the title of the article alone spins the whole story negatively.

Besides the the title it wasn't too bad imho.

asd · « **Reply #2736 on:** October 18, 2014, 09:01:35 PM »

the title ruins it

ChaimMoskowitz · « **Reply #2737 on:** October 18, 2014, 09:02:47 PM »

Why in the world would they cooperate with the NY times on a article like this the title of the article alone spins the whole story negatively.

Title is to draw attention.

Dan · « **Reply #2738 on:** October 18, 2014, 09:21:08 PM »

elit · « **Reply #2739 on:** October 18, 2014, 11:46:31 PM »

Why in the world would they cooperate with the NY times on a article like this the title of the article alone spins the whole story negatively.

It actually was overall a very positive article