oh, well believing Iran is even better than those 2
Okay, so the point seems to be that because Iran says some false stuff, none of its other claims should be taken seriously.
That's a fallacy that can go under either Ad Hominem--attacking the claimant rather than the merits of the claim, or the Genetic Fallacy--a claim is dismissed due to its source and not its merits. I thought utee94 had already addressed this, but let me try to make an example specific to you to make the point.
You have a daughter, I believe. Suppose there's a guy who has made repeated claims over the years he would like to harm your daughter. This guy also says a bunch of other things that are full of crap, meant to intimidate people he has no chance of succeeding in intimidating. Now he informs you he's getting ready to harm your daughter. Do you see how the other stupid claims are irrelevant due to 1) one claim matches a repeated, stated pattern of intent while the others do not, and 2) you have an obligation to take this guy seriously, because after all, it's your daughter.
It's just bad reasoning to throw Iran's other dumb statements in the same bin as them stating "Hey, after years of saying we'd like to nuke Israel if we could, we're doing stuff with uranium that could lead to nuking Israel."
