TCTTS said:

---

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

I saw a thread on the only other message board I frequent besides TexAgs, phantasytour.com, and there is a thread about this movie as well and resident leftists on there are also discrediting the movie they haven't seen and calling it "QAnon adjacent".

I don't even know what QAnon is really, let alone what the hell QAnon adjacent even means (never once posted in the old Q thread here or even read it). I did find it funny though to see the same NPC talking points on a drug band message board as here, though.

---

They aren't "talking points."

It's just basic, common sense.

There are two theoretical paths here...

1) Release a politically neutral movie that depicts the horrors of child trafficking, one that hopefully raises awareness to the point of eventually leading to further tangible action that saves additional children/helps alleviate the problem. In this scenario, no QAnon rhetoric is used by the filmmakers in their promotion of the movie, thus no controversy surrounds the movie, thus the potential exists for the movie to reach a much wider audience, and thus have more of an impact on addressing the issue.

- or -

2) Release the exact same movie as above, with the exact same political neutrality, that has the potential to lead to the exact same outcome as above. However, because QAnon rhetoric is attached to the promotion of it, the potential audience reach is instantly cut in half. Rhetoric that attracts controversial figures like Mel Gibson, Steve Bannon, and Michael Flynn, whom half the country instantly tunes out because of their association and promotion of the movie, assuming the movie is just another crazy conspiracy theory being peddled by the fringe far right.

Not to mention, in the second scenario, because of the QAnon rhetoric being used, the left is further demonized, to a ridiculously insane degree, which of course raises the potential for further Pizzagate-type incidents, or worse.

The media didn't just slap the QAnon stigma on this movie out of thin air, for no good reason. That happened *because* of Jim Caviezel's own words/beliefs. They're *reacting* to Caviezel's own rhetoric, and how his rhetoric has led to the fringe far right using this movie to advance their lunatic conspiracy theories against the left. In other words, the only reason it's being labeled "QAnon adjacent" is because Caviezel hasn't been able to keep his crazy to himself.

Frankly, it just blows my mind that this entire time a handful of us here have been arguing FOR a path that leads to an objectively larger audience for this movie, yet somehow *we're* the villains for expressing our concern.

It's honestly mind-blowing, yet such a simple concept to understand.

---

99% of the county gets movie information from trailers. The QAnon "rhetoric" is missed by those same people. If I asked 100 random people what QAnon was or had to do with 99 of them would have no clue what I was asking about (I don't either),

The only reason I know that some QAnon rhetoric is associated with this movie is because of you and others on this thread claim it. In reality, you're the one promoting the "rhetoric".

Sapper Redux said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Actual child sex trafficking is not a political issue. QAnon conspiracies about trafficking are, and conflating medical care for trans teens with "grooming," certainly is. This film is being marketed specifically to Christian and conservative audiences through Christian and conservative channels. I don't think it's a surprise that it's being ignored by the rest of the population. The choice of subject is also controversial. His organization is not always well regarded by others working on trafficking.

---

---

Do you think viewer reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are an accurate, scientifically verified method for measuring actual audience opinion and engagement? Because if you are, we need to have a discussion about how statistics and polling works.

---

No, but I do know that only eight critics had the courage to even review "What is a Woman?", one of the most talked about and important documentaries of the 21st century.

TCTTS' continued use of the term "conspiracy theory" when that is equivalent to the truth in the year 2023 is mind boggling. I guess some people can never be saved and the fact that this has become a political football is insane.

I've been traveling too much recently to see this, but I'm looking forward to it next week.

It's sad politics has to enter as a backdrop to the conversation, but in 2023 that's par the course for almost everything.

To be fair, that same criticism applies much heavier on across most mainstream movies. I stopped paying attention to things like award shows or promotional interviews where i used to come across most of that. I'm just not interested in their opinions, since they aren't experts. They are also kind boring to me outside of movies, since they lack depth on those topics, and are 100% predictable & they tend to talk in cliches.

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Actual child sex trafficking is not a political issue. QAnon conspiracies about trafficking are, and conflating medical care for trans teens with "grooming," certainly is. This film is being marketed specifically to Christian and conservative audiences through Christian and conservative channels. I don't think it's a surprise that it's being ignored by the rest of the population. The choice of subject is also controversial. His organization is not always well regarded by others working on trafficking.

---

---

Do you think viewer reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are an accurate, scientifically verified method for measuring actual audience opinion and engagement? Because if you are, we need to have a discussion about how statistics and polling works.

---

No, but I do know that only eight critics had the courage to even review "What is a Woman?", one of the most talked about and important documentaries of the 21st century.

TCTTS' continued use of the term "conspiracy theory" when that is equivalent to the truth in the year 2023 is mind boggling. I guess some people can never be saved and the fact that this has become a political football is insane.

---

Please, I beg of you, I would absolutely *love* to hear what of the excerpt below, from my post on the previous page featuring numerous interviews, "is equivalent to the truth in the year 2023"...

Quote:

---

The adrenochroming of children is a QAnon-born conspiracy theory, which is a key tenant of a larger false narrative that claims the existence of a satanic "deep state" cabal of powerful Democrats in government, media, and Hollywood, who participate in an international child sex trafficking ring to harvest adrenochrome from the blood of children to take as a psychedelic or life-extending drug.

---

agracer said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

I saw a thread on the only other message board I frequent besides TexAgs, phantasytour.com, and there is a thread about this movie as well and resident leftists on there are also discrediting the movie they haven't seen and calling it "QAnon adjacent".

I don't even know what QAnon is really, let alone what the hell QAnon adjacent even means (never once posted in the old Q thread here or even read it). I did find it funny though to see the same NPC talking points on a drug band message board as here, though.

---

They aren't "talking points."

It's just basic, common sense.

There are two theoretical paths here...

1) Release a politically neutral movie that depicts the horrors of child trafficking, one that hopefully raises awareness to the point of eventually leading to further tangible action that saves additional children/helps alleviate the problem. In this scenario, no QAnon rhetoric is used by the filmmakers in their promotion of the movie, thus no controversy surrounds the movie, thus the potential exists for the movie to reach a much wider audience, and thus have more of an impact on addressing the issue.

- or -

2) Release the exact same movie as above, with the exact same political neutrality, that has the potential to lead to the exact same outcome as above. However, because QAnon rhetoric is attached to the promotion of it, the potential audience reach is instantly cut in half. Rhetoric that attracts controversial figures like Mel Gibson, Steve Bannon, and Michael Flynn, whom half the country instantly tunes out because of their association and promotion of the movie, assuming the movie is just another crazy conspiracy theory being peddled by the fringe far right.

Not to mention, in the second scenario, because of the QAnon rhetoric being used, the left is further demonized, to a ridiculously insane degree, which of course raises the potential for further Pizzagate-type incidents, or worse.

The media didn't just slap the QAnon stigma on this movie out of thin air, for no good reason. That happened *because* of Jim Caviezel's own words/beliefs. They're *reacting* to Caviezel's own rhetoric, and how his rhetoric has led to the fringe far right using this movie to advance their lunatic conspiracy theories against the left. In other words, the only reason it's being labeled "QAnon adjacent" is because Caviezel hasn't been able to keep his crazy to himself.

Frankly, it just blows my mind that this entire time a handful of us here have been arguing FOR a path that leads to an objectively larger audience for this movie, yet somehow *we're* the villains for expressing our concern.

It's honestly mind-blowing, yet such a simple concept to understand.

---

99% of the county gets movie information from trailers. The QAnon "rhetoric" is missed by those same people. If I asked 100 random people what QAnon was or had to do with 99 of them would have no clue what I was asking about (I don't either),

The only reason I know that some QAnon rhetoric is associated with this movie is because of you and others on this thread claim it. In reality, you're the one promoting the "rhetoric".

---

No clearer truth has been spoken in this thread. The rhetoric is from the left trying to tie the film to Q to shoot it down. Try to mentally associate it with something most are against. Like calling someone a racist to cast aside an otherwise salient point. I'm not sure why anyone would want to push a coordinated media agenda to quash a movie like this.

It's been fun watching and reading what the unhinged left has to say. Frankly, they've been the best advertisement for this flick.

I've been to the theater maybe 4 times this decade…this sounds completely worth it to make that 5 trips.

TCTTS said:

---

Raiderjay said:

---

Quote:

---

What we're saying is that now, in the year 2023, the filmmakers, and a whole slew of others, are using QAnon messaging to promote the movie.

---

Can you point to where the Filmakers and "slew of others" are using QAnon messaging to promote the movie? And something other than "Vice News says".......Actual interviews, promotion videos, etc......

---

Below is an excerpt from an interview, where in Caviezel talks about "the adrenochroming of children" while directly promoting this movie...

Jim Caviezel further pushes the "adrenochrome" conspiracy theory (https://t.co/E3q2Fe2H25): (clip 2/2) pic.twitter.com/xAqNcyJOcz

— Eric Hananoki (ehananokimmfa: threads) (@ehananoki) April 17, 2021

The adrenochroming of children is a QAnon-born conspiracy theory, which is a key tenant of a larger false narrative that claims the existence of a satanic "deep state" cabal of powerful Democrats in government, media, and Hollywood, who participate in an international child sex trafficking ring to harvest adrenochrome from the blood of children to take as a psychedelic or life-extending drug. In 2016, the peddling of this fever dream is what led directly to the man who swallowed the adrenochrome theory hook, line, and sinker, Edgar Maddison Welch, in his attempt to liberate children he believed were being kept captive in a Washington pizza parlor by Hillary Clinton. There, he brandished a rifle and a pistol as he "investigated the crime," threatening customers and employees in the process. He was subsequently arrested and sentenced to four-and-a-half years in jail.

Yet, five years later, despite how close the adrenochome insanity came to resulting in a mass shooting, Caviezel then irresponsibly promoted the bullsh*t theory again, directly to an audience of conservative conspiracy theorists, at what was all but an official QAnon convention, given the other guest speakers and speeches given over the two-day conference.

"Okay, but that was two years ago."

Well, here are a couple of promotional interviews Caviezel gave recently with Steve Bannon, of all people, where in he continues to peddle the same nonsense and more, while now playing the victim card as well…

Actor Jim Caviezel went on Steve Bannon's War Room again, where besides invoking the QAnon-connected adrenochrome conspiracy theory now also claimed it was connected to the false Ukrainian biolabs conspiracy theory — which originally blew up online due to a QAnon influencer. https://t.co/vuXapDbMn7 pic.twitter.com/UQaq1WngMs

— Alex Kaplan (@AlKapDC) June 21, 2023

You can see the entire first interview for yourself here, which includes multiple incoherent rants from Caviezel, with the cherry on top being the long, gonzo tweet that sets it all up (yet another example of how certain radicals are using this movie in attempt to radicalize their followers)…

THE ADRENOCHROME EMPIRE: What is driving the child trafficking demand? Child sex, organ harvesting and Adrenochrome. This is a big deal. Adrenochrome is an Elite drug they have used for many years. 10 times more potent than heroin with mystical qualities to make you look younger.… pic.twitter.com/lSpWniwkzo

— Truth Justice ™ (@SpartaJustice) July 6, 2023

I'm not going to waste more time tracking them all down and linking to them here, but there are plenty of other interviews and tirades out there, along the same lines. Just go look for yourself.

As for Ballard, here he is recently - in promotion of the movie - using the movie to demonize the left to a ridiculous degree. Now, does a *portion* of the left do what he's accusing them of? Yes, absolutely, and I can't stand those assh*les either. But for whatever reason, guys like Ballard can't just talk about this issue as an apolitical tragedy. They can't stop there, they *have* to then turn it into an anti-woke screed, or a giant conspiracy, where in one side of the political spectrum is either responsible for this tragedy, or shares the same values of those perpetuating this tragedy…

Tim Ballard
I had to study their literature (child traffickers/pedophiles)
1. separate children from parents.
2. Sexualize kids let them see pornography.
3. Take God out of education.
4. Kids can consent.
It’s the woke left agenda

Who believes is coincidences? pic.twitter.com/VouCRj0UKN

— Jeff (@ISO_XRP) July 5, 2023

You add all of this together, and it is undeniable that those directly associated with this movie, in conjunction with the controversial voices whom they've inspired and given their time and support, absolutely believe that only one political party is responsible for this tragedy, thus are using this tragedy/movie to demonize the left to a ridiculous, batsh*t insane, QAnon-inspired degree. Which then, in turn, radicalizes gullible right wingers to the point of things like Pizzagate, or worse.

In other words, you have the filmmakers themselves politicizing their own movie, in their promotion of the movie, yet some of you have the audacity to get mad at people like me and "the media" for then associating the movie with QAnon as well. When none of this would be happening if not for the filmmakers' own words.

Do you really not see how hypocritical that is?

Why some of you can't accept this, I will never understand. Why you can't just be like, "It's a great, important movie, but yeah, it sucks that the filmmakers believe and promote this crap," I'll never know. Some of you are, and I appreciate that. But to the rest of you, I just don't know what to say anymore. Especially when I concede all the damn time that Hollywood is full of pieces of sh*t who pull roughly the same crap, yet some of you absolutely refuse to admit that your "side's" sh*t stinks as well.

And look, obviously a number of people here are going to watch the interviews above and come up with all kinds of excuses regardless, because they essentially either believe this crap as well - or - couldn't care less if the left is demonized to the point of collateral damage in the process. So I completely realize even this is going to get some idiotic pushback, but whatever. I've said my piece (in every way possible, across pages of posts), I've brought receipts, and if you guys still want to keep up the gaslighting, go right ahead.

---

If this is all you've got, that says more than I ever could.

TCTTS said:

---

javajaws said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

Interesting....

Here's what they won't admit

Entire media calling Sound of Freedom a QAnon film but ignores the fact that it was made in 2017-2018 before QAnon really even got going

I know why they're doing this, just had to point it out

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) July 9, 2023

---

I'm honestly kind of speechless at this point, at either the ignorance, or the gaslighting nature of arguments like this.

Because no one here is saying there is QAnon messaging within the movie. What we're saying is that now, in the year 2023, the filmmakers, and a whole slew of others, are using QAnon messaging to promote the movie.

That's it and that's all.

This point has been made a kajillion times in this thread, explained in detail, every way possible.

And yet a handful of people here *continue* to push this bad faith nonsense.

---

That tweet wasn't directed at you and its inclusion here in this thread wasn't directed at you either. It was directed at the MSM like CNN who are saying exactly what the tweet is referring to. Yet you still continually jump in all defensive trying to stir the pot every time you feel offended. Maybe you should just stop posting in this thread? Or not. I don't care. But you just seem to keep digging in deeper without anything new to add.

---

And yet my exact point still remains.

Maybe provide a bit more context next time.

---

Or maybe don't always be the victim.

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

javajaws said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

Interesting....

Here's what they won't admit

Entire media calling Sound of Freedom a QAnon film but ignores the fact that it was made in 2017-2018 before QAnon really even got going

I know why they're doing this, just had to point it out

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) July 9, 2023

---

I'm honestly kind of speechless at this point, at either the ignorance, or the gaslighting nature of arguments like this.

Because no one here is saying there is QAnon messaging within the movie. What we're saying is that now, in the year 2023, the filmmakers, and a whole slew of others, are using QAnon messaging to promote the movie.

That's it and that's all.

This point has been made a kajillion times in this thread, explained in detail, every way possible.

And yet a handful of people here *continue* to push this bad faith nonsense.

---

That tweet wasn't directed at you and its inclusion here in this thread wasn't directed at you either. It was directed at the MSM like CNN who are saying exactly what the tweet is referring to. Yet you still continually jump in all defensive trying to stir the pot every time you feel offended. Maybe you should just stop posting in this thread? Or not. I don't care. But you just seem to keep digging in deeper without anything new to add.

---

And yet my exact point still remains.

Maybe provide a bit more context next time.

---

Or maybe don't always be the victim.

---

You're right. It's my *responding* to the people calling me things like a child sex trafficker, pedophile, and evil that's clearly the problem. Definitely not the people actually making those accusations.

TCTTS said:

---

snowdog90 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I seriously doubt I'll be watching the movie myself, but I'll of course wait and reserve judgment to see if this thing really does delve into or hint at a CIA conspiracy component, touches on adrenochroming and the like, or lays the blame on liberals or immigrants or whoever. This Tim Ballard dude is dubious enough, and the loudest voices shilling for this thing are suspect as hell (Mel Gibson, Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, etc), but still.

Either way, the overall concern people have with crap like this is that the filmmakers shouldn't have to rile people up with psyops to get them to care about human trafficking. Because anyone with a heart *already cares* about human trafficking. So then you start wonder if the filmmakers are using a subject like this for nefarious/political purposes, in order to cast one side as evil or "the other" or whatever, because that has certainly been the result so far.

I don't know, the whole thing just stinks to high heaven, and it sounds like people were right to be questioning it from the jump.

---

You posted this gem on page 2. I haven't seen this movie, and probably won't because my job keeps me too busy, but your speculation about it in this post, without seeing it, is pretty telling.

Human trafficking is a devastating reality today and from what I've heard, this movie does a great job of telling an incredible story about this horrible reality. The fact that people on the Left think it's political says a lot about what Leftism is today.

I'll just ask you some questions. Are you familiar with the new label Minor Attracted Person (MAP)?

Was it the Left or the Right who coined this new label?

Are you okay with this label, which at it's core seeks to legitimize adults who are attracted to minors (pedophiles)?

---

Maybe read at least *part* of the next 13 pages before commenting? Where in I've said, numerous times, I'll see the movie.

As for the MAP label, no, I've never once heard that. I assume it's some woke term some idiots on the left came up with, and no, I'm not "okay" with it, or any attempt to legitimize adults who are attracted to minors.

Is this some sad, weird attempt at a "gotcha"?

---

Not a gotcha. I'm glad you don't condone pedophilia as just some choice that rational normal adults can make, but you are a leftist, and many on the left have created the term MAP to normalize and excuse pedophilia. It's sick, and now that you know this, I hope you will fight against it.

As for reading the whole thread, I've read some of your later posts that completely contradict your post above, which is why I posted it.


You are very hing up on adrenochrome. Caviezel talks about adrenochrome because it's real. Qanon did not start an adrenochrome "conspiracy theory". Adrenochrome has been around for a long time...



If you accept that human traficking and child trafficking exist, you must understand that the money made from it is not merely in the sex trade. They use many traficked people for harvesting organs or harvesting adrenochrome and whatever else...

Qanon did not start that term, so when Caviezel uses it, it doesn't mean he's some Qanon cult member. He has obviously immersed himself into the horrible truth of what goes on in this multi-billion dollar industry, and adrenochrome-harvesting for profit is part of the industry.

First of all… okay, QAnon *popularized* adrenochrome. Same difference.

Secondly… I'm not a "leftist." I'm a registered independent who has voted Republican numerous times.

Finally… JFC to all of this. Some of you are so far gone I don't even know why I respond anymore.

snowdog90 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

javajaws said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

Interesting....

Here's what they won't admit

Entire media calling Sound of Freedom a QAnon film but ignores the fact that it was made in 2017-2018 before QAnon really even got going

I know why they're doing this, just had to point it out

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) July 9, 2023

---

I'm honestly kind of speechless at this point, at either the ignorance, or the gaslighting nature of arguments like this.

Because no one here is saying there is QAnon messaging within the movie. What we're saying is that now, in the year 2023, the filmmakers, and a whole slew of others, are using QAnon messaging to promote the movie.

That's it and that's all.

This point has been made a kajillion times in this thread, explained in detail, every way possible.

And yet a handful of people here *continue* to push this bad faith nonsense.

---

That tweet wasn't directed at you and its inclusion here in this thread wasn't directed at you either. It was directed at the MSM like CNN who are saying exactly what the tweet is referring to. Yet you still continually jump in all defensive trying to stir the pot every time you feel offended. Maybe you should just stop posting in this thread? Or not. I don't care. But you just seem to keep digging in deeper without anything new to add.

---

And yet my exact point still remains.

Maybe provide a bit more context next time.

---

Or maybe don't always be the victim.

---

You're right. It's my *responding* to the people calling me things like a child sex trafficker, pedophile, and evil that's clearly the problem. Definitely not the people actually making those accusations.

---

Haa anybody called you those things in this thread? I know I haven't, and I'm not trying to say any of that.

---

Yes, 100%. Staff has had to delete numerous posts.

This thread has indeed been entertaining. I guess that's why they call it the entertainment board. But at the same time I can see the crazies from all sides here, up down left right and center. My reaction:

For a film that cost about $14m to make, this is pretty impressive.

#Breaking at @AngelStudiosInc we are projecting a STUNNING $40 Million cumulative total for @SOFMovie2023 due to a strong showing over the weekend. #SoundOfFreedom #SoundofFreedomMovie #2MillionFor2Million https://t.co/3KsOZzo4NO

— Matthew Faraci (@MatthewFaraci) July 9, 2023

TCTTS said:

---

First of all… okay, QAnon *popularized* adrenochrome. Same difference.

Secondly… I'm not a "leftist." I'm a registered independent who has voted Republican numerous times.

Finally… JFC to all of this. Some of you are so far gone I don't even know why I respond anymore.

---

Ok. My bad on the leftist thing, but in my experience with you in the past is that you are on the left of most issues. No worries. You can disagree with people, it doesn't make you evil, and those that said that are wrong and stupid.

I think Caviezel and Ballard are truly motivated by the horrors of what they've seen, not by Qanon. The messaging of adrenochrome is an example. Just because Qanon "popularized" it doesn't make it false.

Human traficking is the most heinous thing in the world today, I'm sure you agree, so I'm happy with any movie that raises awareness of just how horrific it is.

Also... It is NOT a LEFT problem. It is a HUMAN problem. The most notorious human trafficking ring in the 80's was run by Lawrence King, a scumbag Republican donor who traficked kids out of Boystown, if I remember correctly.

Honestly...why do you? I'm at a loss to why you've kept this up for 15 pages.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Honestly...why do you? I'm at a loss to why you've kept this up for 15 pages.

---

Victimhood.

I'm more alarmed at the people on this thread that dismissed trafficking worldwide as a niche issue that isn't worth discussing……

The Q stuff in general has gotten blown up by the media. I follow politics closely and I wouldn't have even been aware of Qanon but for the wacko thread on F16. I understand why the media has started to talk about it more. The Q stuff is completely insane and folds in the Pizzagate and Jade Helm crowd. It is an easy target for Democrats just like Antifa and communist communities in Portland are easy targets for Republicans. But the people the believe it or even know what Q is is microscopic.

Q isn't worth discussing and isn't worth much more than an eye roll when celebs or anyone even bring it up. That's why Jan 6th, for all its ugliness, consisted of a few hundred fat guys in camo.

Quote:

---

Ultimately, do I actually care what these people think? No.

---

uhh, clearly you do.

Quote:

---

What I do care about though is seeing them spread their bullsh*t publicly. On the bright side, this thread was seemingly the culmination of all of it, to the Nth degree, so at least it hopefully can't get any worse.

---

Quote:

---

Am I looking for sympathy points here? Not at all.

---

Yes you are.

Right on cue…

TCTTS said:

---

Right on cue…

---

Right on cue.

We're officially in "I know you are but what am I" territory with that.

TCTTS said:

---

snowdog90 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

javajaws said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

Interesting....

Here's what they won't admit

Entire media calling Sound of Freedom a QAnon film but ignores the fact that it was made in 2017-2018 before QAnon really even got going

I know why they're doing this, just had to point it out

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) July 9, 2023

---

I'm honestly kind of speechless at this point, at either the ignorance, or the gaslighting nature of arguments like this.

Because no one here is saying there is QAnon messaging within the movie. What we're saying is that now, in the year 2023, the filmmakers, and a whole slew of others, are using QAnon messaging to promote the movie.

That's it and that's all.

This point has been made a kajillion times in this thread, explained in detail, every way possible.

And yet a handful of people here *continue* to push this bad faith nonsense.

---

That tweet wasn't directed at you and its inclusion here in this thread wasn't directed at you either. It was directed at the MSM like CNN who are saying exactly what the tweet is referring to. Yet you still continually jump in all defensive trying to stir the pot every time you feel offended. Maybe you should just stop posting in this thread? Or not. I don't care. But you just seem to keep digging in deeper without anything new to add.

---

And yet my exact point still remains.

Maybe provide a bit more context next time.

---

Or maybe don't always be the victim.

---

You're right. It's my *responding* to the people calling me things like a child sex trafficker, pedophile, and evil that's clearly the problem. Definitely not the people actually making those accusations.

---

Haa anybody called you those things in this thread? I know I haven't, and I'm not trying to say any of that.

---

Yes, 100%. Staff has had to delete numerous posts.

---

Bull***** I've followed this thread closely and not a single person has called you any of that and nothing has been removed. The victimhood is strong with this one.

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

snowdog90 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

javajaws said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

Interesting....

Here's what they won't admit

Entire media calling Sound of Freedom a QAnon film but ignores the fact that it was made in 2017-2018 before QAnon really even got going

I know why they're doing this, just had to point it out

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) July 9, 2023

---

I'm honestly kind of speechless at this point, at either the ignorance, or the gaslighting nature of arguments like this.

Because no one here is saying there is QAnon messaging within the movie. What we're saying is that now, in the year 2023, the filmmakers, and a whole slew of others, are using QAnon messaging to promote the movie.

That's it and that's all.

This point has been made a kajillion times in this thread, explained in detail, every way possible.

And yet a handful of people here *continue* to push this bad faith nonsense.

---

That tweet wasn't directed at you and its inclusion here in this thread wasn't directed at you either. It was directed at the MSM like CNN who are saying exactly what the tweet is referring to. Yet you still continually jump in all defensive trying to stir the pot every time you feel offended. Maybe you should just stop posting in this thread? Or not. I don't care. But you just seem to keep digging in deeper without anything new to add.

---

And yet my exact point still remains.

Maybe provide a bit more context next time.

---

Or maybe don't always be the victim.

---

You're right. It's my *responding* to the people calling me things like a child sex trafficker, pedophile, and evil that's clearly the problem. Definitely not the people actually making those accusations.

---

Haa anybody called you those things in this thread? I know I haven't, and I'm not trying to say any of that.

---

Yes, 100%. Staff has had to delete numerous posts.

---

Bull***** I've followed this thread closely and not a single person has called you any of that and nothing has been removed. The victimhood is strong with this one.

---

Why would I make up something that can be verified by staff if not other posters here?

redsquirelAG absolutely accused me of trafficking children simply because I work in Hollywood. He said there was no way I could have gotten to where I was (as if I was some big shot, which I'm not) without compromising myself. At best, he implied I was covering for all the people I knew in Hollywood who were involved, while a couple of other posters echoed this sentiment and piled on to various degrees.

Another poster then accused me of being a pedophile, while others heavily implied that I was at least excusing/endorsing pedophellia. One hilarious example given was that because I posted a spoiler thread for The Flash, which was then linked to, that meant I had endorsed Ezra Miller, pedophillia, and everything else Miller stood for (which couldn't have been further from reality).

I'm sorry the truth enrages you so much, but you'll just have to get over it.

Pretty great movie. Not sure why a movie like that should be met with any scrutiny st all. Yet, here we are.

I am really amazed they made this film for $14M. It really does feel like a $50M+ film. Not sure which department gets credit for stretching a budget but that person/team is the star here.