Asks this youngster in the following video:
For me, the answer is easy. There is quite simply no movement in recent memory more self-righteously judgmental, close-minded or intolerant than the modern Left. I used to say hypocritical as well, but I recently was corrected there. More on that some other time. This movie was made by someone who doesn't conform to liberalism. There's your controversy.
Of course like most things, there can be more than one reason. Another issue with this is that human trafficking is a part of modern slavery euphemistically called human trafficking, and is irrevocably tied up with the global sex industry. Which, by the way, if taken as a whole has annual revenues that would make Jeff Bezos drool.
In the last decade or so, we've started talking about this human tragedy, though in small doses. Usually as narrow, isolated or local interest stories. We don't focus on it as a branch of the modern, borderless slave trade that it is. That's because we don't like to think that the thing we have declared unpardonable and all defining - slavery - is still alive and well in our modern age. Heaven forbid some of us might benefit from it, or other variations of it (such as sweat shops or child labor camps).
Beyond that, the sex trafficking part is linked to the overall sex industry, which exists in its vast form today due to our modern sex culture. The media, and the Left in general, are loath to draw thick lines between sex and anything negative. Let people die of AIDS by the millions, let old and new STDs run rampant, let plane loads of children be whisked away as sex slaves, and we might mention something. We might even do something. But we will never, ever connect the dots. If doing something means we might end up with those dots connected? Better we do nothing at all.
Nonetheless, the biggest problem with this film is that this subject is being brought out by a non-progressive. Someone they say is linked to something called QAnon. I have no clue what QAnon is beyond it being brought up in modern discourse. I'm told it's some radical rightwing pack of lies and conspiracy theories.
But the ones saying that about QAnon insist it's sexist to say men and women are intrinsically different, that clearly a man hitting a woman is worse because men and women are intrinsically different, and of course men and women don't biologically exist because they are subjective identities whereby a man can give birth and a woman develop testicular cancer. So pardon me if my faith in such sources about who the big conspiracy theorists are is on shaky ground.
QAnon, as I understand it, is a huge web of conspiracy theories, largely centering around Trump and how he will save the US (and the world in some iterations) from demonic influence in the form of the Clintons, AOC, and other liberal politicians. Apparently these politicians are part of a satanic cult that enslaves children and harvests their blood(?) or something, though that may be part of a separate conspiracy that gets kind of folded in with QAnon. QAnon itself centers on the figure of Q, supposedly a high clearance government figure who post cryptic messages on nasty websites like 4chan and 8kun that predict what Trump is going to do and how he will save everyone (in very vague terms that are always easily debunked). Obviously, it was a lot bigger when Trump was in office, and I haven’t heard much about it since he left. It’s a lot of insanity and nonsense, and they seem to drag it up every now and then to discredit people (like the January 6 protesters, and I’m sure there were some QAnon people there, but they all got labeled that way). The issue is, it gets linked to conservatives who speak out against child trafficking, and is used to discredit them, because the whole crazy satanic child kidnapping cult thing is part of QAnon, so “obviously” any conservative who is against child trafficking must be a QAnon crazy. I’m not sure what’s the case here, whether the person really is linked to QAnon or not, but there’s a rundown on the context (as far as I know it) for you.
ReplyDeleteConsidering that the movie was made 5 years ago, it would be a neat trick for the movie to be linked to something that didn't exist at the time.
DeleteOf course Tim Ballard and his group have expressly denounced and condemned the conspiracists but it's funny how the Left doesn't let little things like details or truth get in the way of their smears.
Seems to me the only ones talking about Q'Anon is the left. As Nate said the movie was made before it even existed. I've been a Trump supporter from the beginning though he was not my first consideration as a candidate in 2015 and Q never entered my views or sphere of influence. It is the lefts way of smearing anyone who does not toe the line of leftist thought and speaks out. We have to be part of conspiracy cult.Screw Q and all it's suppose to mean and lets not give the media the time of day. The few that believe and follows Q are the fringe Right and the sheeple of the left who believe everything the media says about the Right.
DeleteMaybe if the author knew anything about QAnon (his alleged lack of knowledge only plausible by someone who never picks up a news periodical or watches anything but highly filtered and slanted fake news outlets) he might adopt the Roseann Rosannadanna "Never mind" retraction. Regardless of his beliefs during filming, both Tim Ballard and Jim Caviezel have both attended or spoken at QAnon gatherings and promoted its themes. Inexplicably, Ballard just recently separated from the group he founded after investigations of the group's claims and it's habit of returning rescued kids to the streets to fend for themselves. So, no, there is no left wing conspiracy, there is no Anon, and somethings are very fishy about the now disappeared Ballard.
Deleteboth Tim Ballard and Jim Caviezel have both attended or spoken at QAnon gatherings and promoted its themes
DeleteYeah... considering that I've seen plenty of your types anon defining "qanon" gatherings and themes as "anything I disagree with" I'm going to need to see more concrete evidence before your witch-hunt style guilt by loose association holds any water. Otherwise you're just another peddler of the "hitler ate sugar" fallacy.
somethings are very fishy about the now disappeared Ballard.
Now disappeared? He literally was live on Tim Pool's show last night where he revealed the new charity he's working on. Doesn't seem like much of a disappearance to me.
And here's the other catch for people like you and Mark Shea. I can't help notice that every time you all want to use such exact, precise definitions in order to label someone a liar, you end up every bit the dishonest liar yourself applying the same standards and exactness.
Sorry, chum but the Left has proven itself too hypocritical and dishonest the last couple of years, nobody is buying what you're selling any more.
I fear the tendency to label anyone right of center as QAnon this, or white nationalist that, or white supremacist over there (or ally of white supremacist, based on the ethnicity in question), or fascist and so on, makes such charges suspect at best. I have no doubt there are some crazy people who follow crazy things. And no doubt some swing right of center. But the ones saying this also insist on some crazy things, and unlike the crazy to the right that is often rejected by most on the right, much of the crazy on the left is official dogma (see the contradictory beliefs about gender above). That’s why I'm willing to set aside concerns about crazy when it comes to fighting child sex slavery. After all, if I had to throw out anything due to any connection to crazy, I'd have to ignore almost everything espoused by our world today.
DeleteTrent here echoes a lot of your points but also adds some great contrasts. Including clips from earlier reviewers I had also seen.
ReplyDeleteI think things are taking off fast. In the end, my blame will be with conservatives who still aren't rallying together to stop the crazy. Pretty soon it will be clear we won't, no matter what. And when surveying the ashes of our civilization, I fear future historians will blame us, not the ones pushing the evil.
Delete“Sound of Freedom" was completed some 5 years ago when QAnon was just beginning to be heard about here and there, and the movie has absolutely nothing to do with the conspiracy group. Moreover, the movie rights were first owned by 20th Century Fox, but when it was bought by the ever-increasingly demonic Disney in early 2019, the movie was shelved by Disney (gee, I wonder why). Finally, Angel Studios was able to buy the rights from Disney so the movie could be shown.
ReplyDeleteWhat the Left is now engaged in doing is playing their typical guilt by association game based on the fact that Jim Caviezel and Tim Ballard have mentioned some things about some troubling practices that have also been brought up by QAnon. As a result, we get this "dazzling" piece of BS logic from the Left:
"Caviezel and Ballard have made various claims about very troubling practices involving horrific abuses of children."
"Conspiracy group QAnon has also made similar claims about very troubling practices involving horrific abuses of children."
"Therefore, the claims made by Caviezel and Ballard, since they are also made by QAnon, make Caviezel and Ballard part of QAnon, and their claims are ultimately just QAnon conspiracy theories. Moreover, 'Sound of Freedom' grossly exaggerates the problem of child sex trafficking, and so it is a piece of propaganda promoting QAnon conspiracy theories."
___________
As of today, one source indicates that "Sound of Freedom" has grossed some $53 million at the Box Office. Already a success in this regard since it was made on a $14 million dollar budget. And it hasn't even been distributed worldwide yet. The more and more the Left whines and lies about the movie and Ballard and Caviezel, the more attention the movie garners as more and more sound thinking people are judging for themselves instead of listening to the Left, which also causes the Left to have more hissy fits they most righteously deserve to suffer.
I've said one of the grave evils we have embraced, courtesy of conditioning by the press, is to immediately ask how a human tragedy can be exploited, and then care or not care accordingly. This is in lockstep with the push by various leftwing movements to insist on total conformity or else, even if it means hurting those in need. Think of the push to make any adoption agencies, even religious ones, conform to gay rights doctrines or lose the ability to help homeless children. The Left puts a premium on total conformity. To that end, helping rescue children from sex slavery might be a good thing. But nothing is more important than conformity, even if it means hamstringing what might help the cause if those doing the helping don't conform.
DeleteI'm not very familiar with Q'Anon aside from a general understanding, but after watching the events and aftermath of Jan. 6, I'm not entirely sure it (Q'Anon) wasn't state operatives just messing with people to make Trump supporters look extra crazy and discredit them.
ReplyDeleteI know little about QAnon. It seems a group that espouses all manner of crazy theories. But the ones calling them crazy are the ones who say a man can get pregnant, and believed that Brett Kavanaugh was the president and CEO of a vast national sex slave operation. Not to mention that in modern parlance 'conspiracy theory' increasingly means nothing other than 'refusing to accept the authoritative leftwing media narrative.' So I take such charges with a block of salt.
Delete