It omits the fact that there is a Greek text for the quotation in the NT text itself, which generally differs from the Hebrew Masoretic text (and sometimes from the Greek LXX as well) in many ways beside the "divine name". The NWT follows this (NT Greek) text for the OT quotations, except for the "divine name".Furuli argues that none of the Septuagint manuscripts before the second century CE contain kurios as a substitute for the TG.
I was not referring to the LXX, but to the very NT reading of the quotations, which may or may not reflect the LXX.
About the LXX, it has been amply demonstrated (especially from the wealth of pre-Christian references and quotations, by Aristobulus or Philo for instance -- Leolaia made a comprehensive post not long ago about it) that the substitution of kurios to Yhwh belongs to the original LXX, even though the oldest extant mss happen to reflect a particular Palestinian-influenced recension which reintroduces the Tetragrammaton.
Ironically enough, the NWT itself demonstrates that at least some NT authors did read kurios instead of Yhwh, since the introduction of "Jehovah" into the quotation destroys the line of argument (which is centered on the word kurios)and the very point of the quotation (e.g. Romans 10 and 14).
...OUTLAW