Israeli Defense Chief: The problem doesn't necessarily stop on December 21, 2012

reply to post by TheBigDuke

I'm starting to wonder if it was a slip of the tongue. I mean he is only human after all (unless you believe David Icke lol.) Have you ever spoken while not totally paying attention to what you're saying? Sometimes your subconscious takes over and lets things slide.

Reporters may have written down what he said verbatim, but later on changed it when they were told to.

Gerald Celente - 30 Apr 2012
war is very close
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Xaphan
Even hours after reading this my mind won't stop racing around it. I too was always very skeptical of the whole 2012 thing. But why would he say that? Does this signify the date that Israel is going to drop a huge bomb on somebody or commit a mass genocide?

By the way, I found an article that contains the unedited quote: warsclerotic.wordpress.com...

Two things I noticed, in both the article you shared, and the article that the OP copy pasted from, the words "The problem doesn't necessarily stop on December 21 2012, is not in full quotation marks. (notice the open quotation marks, not closed quotation marks) This is not something that a reputable paper would do, its too big a mistake, not closing the quotation marks means it was not a real "quote." Someone is playing games, it is not an actual quotation.

I saw this once concerning the war, they claimed it was a quote but did not have it in full quotation marks (I think it was the mail online or someone similar had done this) and come to find out it was never a quote, just something added to make it look like the person they were "quoting" said it. They did not close the quotation marks so they couldn't get in trouble for what they did, but added the first quotation marks to lead astray the people who might believe the lie.

reply to post by Jameela

For some reason they are all like that. Here are two more:

articles.businessinsider.com...
mobile.wnd.com...

Originally posted by Xaphan
reply to post by Jameela

 

For some reason they are all like that. Here are two more:

articles.businessinsider.com...
mobile.wnd.com...

That's because they are all quoting from the original article, if you take a portion from a source, you cannot change it in any way.

If there is a grammatical mistake you can add [sic] immediately following the mistake but doing so makes you look arrogant and it's usage is discouraged by all but the most arrogant. However, you cannot change the mistake.

Anything added by you to a quoted source has to be in brackets [ ] in order to set your words off from the original, this is occasionally done to clarify the context you are using the quoted source in, but in this way what you add is set off from the original, and noted thus as not being part of the original source.

Six army battalions called up under emergency orders to meet growing threat on Egypt, Syria borders
“This signifies that the IDF regards the Egyptian and Syrian borders as the potential source of a greater threat than in the past,” the former deputy chief of staff, Dan Harel, said on Wednesday night
www.timesofisrael.com...