User talk:76.22.25.102

Wow, thanks for replying to a year old post.

It wasn't about facts. It was a cover up. If the hostage had been a regular guy, his kidnapping would have been widely known. And yes, I provided reliable information from an Afghan news agency and an Italian news agency. And obviously, the information turned out to be factually accurate and factually verifiable. Get your facts straight. And belated thanks for your sarcastic comment. --72.186.99.104 (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:97.106.45.230

You don't seem to understand a thing.

The point is that Pahjwok is a well known, award-winning and factually verifiable source. Wikipedia knew that all along. They used the "unreliable source" pretext as a cover up, simpleton. Pahjwok is just as reliable as Reuters, Associated Press and AFP. Get that through your thick head and stop pitching a fit because you were proven wrong, child. CHEERS! :P --72.186.99.104 (talk) 18:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.