Providing a BBC video of a Sandy Hooks victim also in Pakistan was provided to generate debate. You just flatly denied it with no evidence. That is fine.
Just to clarify on the umpteenth thing. It is actually the third time I stated this. One time for critical thinkers theories. For critical thinking theories, I said they are either paid or blind faith when it comes to arguing against so much evidence with no evidence. The the other two times was for the illogical, cold hearted responses to the plight of the Palestinian people.
I noticed you tend to call people liars that disagree with you. You did the same thing to Zone before she left.
first of all your video does -not- show 'a sandy hook victim also in pakistan'...all it shows is that someone in pakistan had a picture of this child...a picture which is widely available on the internet...there is a -huge- difference...
also i did not just 'flatly deny it'...what i did was provide a much more sensible explanation than any conspiracy theorist has offered...it is not difficult to imagine someone in pakistan looking for pictures for a poster and doing an internet search for something like 'school shooting victims' and getting search results that included victims of other school shootings such as the sandy hook shooting...and then mistakenly including one of those photos on their poster...
i even posted an example where something like this happened before...where a bin laden supporter absentmindedly included a photo from an internet joke of osama bin laden sitting next to a sesame street character in a poster which they obviously put together from images they found online...
and all of this without having to invoke a complicated and increasingly self contradictory theory of a global conspiracy that controls everything without being noticed except by loonytunes on the internet who are never silenced by this cabal that silences all dissenters with impunity...
the insinuation that people who disagree with conspiracy delusions are being paid by governments has been thrown around a lot on this forum...by you and by others...and now hypocritically so because you yourself have provided -no evidence- that it is happening here on this site...
for that matter those who reject conspiracy delusions are not arguing against 'so much evidence'...we argue against some of the sloppiest 'research' ever done and some of the most convoluted and self contradictory 'reasoning' ever attempted...
and i don't call people liars for disagreeing with me...i call people liars for insistently promoting things that they know are untrue or that they persist in refusing to support with evidence...that would include you and your 'paid government plants' accusation...