That's all the excuse Iran will need to go in and take over.

You dont argue with me you just call me names, but ive gotten used to you though. Im saddened that you diddnt call me anything in this last post.

but i warn ya, once you read the crazy stuff i post, your path to the dark side will have begun.

Anyway... in the post where i left a link to informationclearinghouse, they linked the transcript from the NYT. Then they explain how MEMRI changed the translation.

Ok then... now that you see, this here is a link to the same website you used in an earlier post that quoted Irans prez as saying "Israel should be wiped off the map".

Let's quote from your beloved "debunking"

but

Both informationcleearinghouse and the NYT are jokes, the fact that you hold them up as paragons of truth is a shining example of why you're a moron.

lets get back to how you said that iran wanted to nuke israel, that was a drama troll lie, then your equally blind tag team buddy posted a link stating that israel should be wiped off of the map, which is another lie.

there we go, cant attack the link now so we'll attack the linker by calling me a liar, moron, idiot ect...

you assclownhat

i obviously cant have a debate with either of you

You moron, even Al-Jeezera, no friend to either the US or Israel said Ahmadinejad said he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map"
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...CE0E9957EA.htm

Edit: I think it's pretty indictive of your insanity that you're trying so hard to defend a lunatic like Iran's president.

He never said he wanted to nuke Israel, he is smarter then that, he would never say that.

He has said

"The peaceful Iranian nuclear technology will not pose a threat to any party because we want peace and stability and we will not cause injustice to anyone and at the same time we will not submit to injustice" April 13, 2006

On January 11, 2006, Ahmadinejad announced that Iran will have peaceful nuclear technology very soon. He also emphasized that making the nuclear bomb is not the policy of his government. In his words : "We would like to send the message to those who claim Iran is searching for nuclear weapons that there is no such policy and this [policy] is illegal and against our religion."

Take it for what ever it is worth, I have a hard time trusting him personally

He also said

In October 2005 Ahmadinejad gave a speech opposing Zionism that contained antagonistic statements about the State of Israel. He agreed with a statement he attributed to Khomeini that the "occupying regime" must be wiped off the map or eliminated. He also referred to Israel as a "disgraceful stain [in] the Islamic world."

In December 2005 Ahmadinejad also made several controversial statements regarding the Holocaust and the State of Israel, at one point referring to the Holocaust as a "myth" and criticizing European laws against Holocaust denial. He said that although he does not know whether or not nor to what extent the Holocaust occurred, if it had in fact occurred, European countries should make amends to the Jewish people by giving them land to establish a state in Europe (Germany, Austria or other countries), the United States, Canada or Alaska instead of making "the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime." These statements were also condemned by many world leader.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad

LOL im not defending Irans pres, Im just pointing out what a dumfuck parrot spin machine you are. Maybe if you took your head out of your ass tommy boy you could see.

bzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrong go back to spin school


wrong again, you cant even read your own link right

the quote was (taken from your own link)

hes quoting kohmeni, the pres never stated it, but its still not correct because he diddnt use he term "israel"

btw are you giving al jazeera credibility over the NYT? This could get fun. :)


Sinner got the quote correct.

Well considering Ahmadinejad is nothing but a puppet of the mullahs it really doesn't matter if he said it or they did, he repeated it without repudiation, leading to the simple conclusion that he believes in it as well. It's not that hard to figure out, maybe if you stopped fawning over him you would see it as well.

Also, I'd give a street urchin credibility over the NYT, hell my border collie has more credibility than they do. But in this case, considering it concerns a translation of arabic speech, I'll be more apt to believe the side that's is, you know, arabic.

Go on defending Ahmadinejad, it's interesting to see the disintegration of a liberal mind right before my own eyes. Why don't you throw in spirited defense of Zarqawi since we're all here?

Gotta wonder what the acidhead thinks Iran will use to wipe Israel off the map?


Handi-wipes maybe?

Hegemonic

Malvachat asked you a question that you never answered, i'd like the answer aswell, According to you, what sources are reliable?

I like my news sources to report the news, not try to make it.

I'd have no problem with certain news outlets if the just admitted their bias, the New York Times admitted they're liberally biased and that's fine, I don't respect them as a news source but at least they get my respect for admitting it so I know they can be properly ignored.

Care to tell what sources do you trust? CNN, MSNBC, Faux News, Blogs...? A direct answer would be nice :ND:

Well Mizz, I don't trust any source really, but that might just be that I see journalists as only eager to get the next pulitzer or book deal instead of actually reporting the news, they gotta break that story or they're quietly shuffled off to report on a town meeting in Peoria and some hot new desk jockey is given their beat. Everyone has a bias, you really just have to learn to see through them to get to the actual story.

edited by jackspratts - name removed

Well...

Weter your name is CZAR or span or your latest one, you still are the same person, why bother with changing names anyway? And BTW, since you can't come up with an answer, you had to resort to, you know what, that's pretty lame of you.

the answer is actually "i trust whichever news source supports my particular ideological bent" but you know, he can't actually come out and say it. same shit, different nic.

I gave you an answer, several times in fact. Sorry I didn't give you one which would allow you to continue with your predetermined opinion. I know you were probably hoping I would say something like "I LEIK FAUX NEWZ!" so you could continue along the path I could see you heading down, sorry sweettits, ain't gonna happen.

Don't worry too much about.
It's what I have come to expect.
Entrenched views,won't even consider another view point.
It's not hard to make your mind up about something,if you have all ready made your mind up.
I try to be fair to everybody.
Anybody spot the credible answer?

I consider other viewpoints all the time. It's just that when they're not factual it kinda irks me.

A lot of people around here don't even adopt a viewpoint they just parrot whatever they find appealing. Ask them a question that requires some original thinking and they just about fall off their perch.

i get it now, your mad at yourself, i understand why too. thats ok tho, i know you still have some good in you. let it out for the world to see sunshine. :)

easy polly, ya dont wana dirty your cage again
hehe

wow two self reflections in a row